Will Kate Middleton visit Wimbledon?
Last week it was Royal Ascot, this week and next it’s Wimbledon. With such entertainment on offer during a packed summer season, it’s not surprising that Royal news is all about sport.
It doesn’t help, of course, that Princes William and Harry are mostly away on military service, while their girlfriends are either keeping a low profile or completing university exams.
So, what’s happening this week? Kate Middleton’s sister Pippa, now working as a party organizer, gave Ascot a miss last week, as did the rest of her family, despite rumours to the contrary. She will, however, visit Wimbledon this week:
“I’ve not been to Ascot because I don’t like racing, but I love tennis and I’m going to get along some time [this] week.”
Perhaps the same reasoning applies to Kate and, just as in previous years, she will make a regal appearance in the Royal Box.
There’s also some chatter around that Pippa is still seeing old uni chum and flatmate, George Percy, heir to the Duke of Northumberland. “It’s true we’re often seen together, but we’re not going out, we are just very old friends,” she said, modestly.
I don’t remember Kate being in the Royal box at Wimbledon. Wouldn’t she only be let in as a guest of a member of the RF?.
By Trudie on June 25th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
There’s always plenty of “love” in the air at Wimbledon.
By Arthur on June 25th, 2008 at 5:15 pm
DM has an article on Prince Harry’s visit to the Royal Norfolk agricultural show today– an official royal engagement. So perhaps he isn’t completely tied up with military duties, and may be at Wimbledon with Kate and/or Chelsy.
By Evelyn on June 25th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
Despite Pippa’s demure reply, wouldn’t it be something if Pippa married Hotspur and Catherine marries Prince William? What is young Percy like, John, is he well-regarded, well-educated and worthy of his lineage?
By Gigi on June 25th, 2008 at 6:31 pm
I know this may sound horrible, but between Kate and William and now possibly Pippa and George, two words come to mind regarding the Middletons: Social Climbing. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.
By Fiona on June 25th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
Newbie here! I must say it is very refreshing to find a royal site that isn’t filled with anti-Kate venom. There is so much obvious jealousy towards Kate online it’s unbelievable. I think Kate will be the perfect consort for Prince William.
By Lizzy on June 25th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
I really do not see a suspect motive here, Fiona. Just because one of the persons who make up a couple are from a less monied family than the other does not mean that they are social climbing. If Pippa was actually social climbing, there are many more illustrious and more monied young men she might have been interested in. After all, unless Prince William and Prince Harry were to marry a Princess of Royal Blood whose parent was a reigning monarch of a kingdom of the stature of Great Britain (and none such exists), the match is unequal. For young Percy to make an equal match, his choice must be the daughter of a Dukedom as ancient and illustrious as Northumberland, and there are not many to choose from. As we have seen in the past, far better for the young people to marry whom they love, irrespective of rank and wealth.
By Gigi on June 25th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
To be totally honest with you, I don’t find much wrong with social climbing. In my opinion, everybody wants to be apart of high society. People now often form their own society groups. It’s been done for hundreds of years. Look at William & Harry friends, now I’m sure they are great people hang around with, and very loyal to them but no one can tell me that they don’t enjoy being part of the “royal click”. William & Harry are always making friends with people and they very careful in picking them. Now if Pippa wants to go after the future Duke of Northumberland, then so be it.
By Rman on June 25th, 2008 at 7:41 pm
I wouldn’t call it social climbing. That is the circle of friends she runs in. Who do people expect her to date? You normally date people with similar interests and friends.
By maddie on June 25th, 2008 at 7:59 pm
I think George is supposed to be a friend of Pippa’s but regardless William, Harry and no dobut George are all smart young men. William and Harry in particular have said as per Rman in interviews that in the past they have come across individuals who wanted to be friends with them just because of who they were. So with regards to Kate I think that after 6 years he knows her quite well and obviously is happy. Gigi is also right there are very few of titled women around, who would be on par with either William or George, and also no guarantees that a relationship would form with those types of women even if they were around…..
By Jackie Mccoy on June 25th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
Gigi, I believe George Percy has a degree from Edinburgh University, and was a contemporary flatmate of Pippa. Beyond that, it’s all behind closed doors.
By John on June 25th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
Fiona, social upward-mobility is an asset in any society. Compare it with its opposite : social downward-mobility.
By John on June 25th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Very true Jackie.
By Rman on June 25th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
Just like Kate and William, Pippa and George seem to have a longstanding relationship. Whatever the jealous-bunch may think, the Middleton sisters do attract loyalty from their menfolk.
Isn’t that a sign of excellence?
By John on June 25th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
Well said, John, it is, indeed, a sign of excellence!
I will be most grateful if the Princes, George Percy and the Middleton sisters marry whom they love and lead happy, useful lives. I looked at the article and the photos in the Daily Mail of Prince Harry, handsome and winsome in his suit and dress shirt, delighting and beguiling everyone at the farming exhibit. What a wonderful disposition he has! His charming ways with the public and his genuine interest in everything and everybody are so refreshing, so affirming. I am very pleased! Every time I see and read about our two Golden Princes doing so well, I feel as if I have won the Derby! 
By Gigi on June 25th, 2008 at 9:19 pm
If I have any quibble with Harry’s behavior at out-n-abouts, he always seems to be clowning (take the Garter ceremony, for example). Sure, it is kind of silly for him to spend an afternoon inspecting cows’ udders, but it’s not silly for the farmers who devote their lives and livelihoods to it.
He needs to be careful not to treat everything in his lot to be a bit of a joke. He has made it clear that he does not consider it his fate to lead a “normal life”, but one hopes he doesn’t believe his fate to be completely absurd, and therefore not to be taken seriously.
If the people find him to be insincere, his good looks won’t bide him over for long. As it is, many people turn a blind eye in order to take the Royals seriously; senior Royals have learned that they fare best when they return the favor.
By Dan on June 25th, 2008 at 9:39 pm
As far as the Midds sis’, there is nothing wrong with marrying well. We all want our children to find love, and happiness, and if the man or woman is well situated, all the better. My mom always says,” it’s just as easy to fall in love with a poor guy as a rich guy”. With regards to PH. He’s just beginning to gel in his role. I’m not making excuses, well maybe, but I’ve worked with large breed animals, uncle is a dairy farmer, they are loose canons. I know everyone in the British Isles are highly mannered, but I doubt that the live stock there would say, “sorry old chap, but got to urinate”. Not going to happen.
By jacqueline on June 25th, 2008 at 11:18 pm
Perhaps the solution for Harry is to send him to the places he cares about. Instead of trotting him out to cattle shows, where he can’t help but look like a Royal Prince surveying his lowly subjects, send him to hospitals caring for wounded veterans; or the clinics working with veterans with stress disorders; or the bases with women and men deployed abroad, who have plenty of children who might be cheered by his presence, who are not just Hello mag readers looking for a snap on their cellphone cameras. Harry might do a world of good if he follows the example of his mother, and makes something meaningful out of his “Royal role.” Let Charles, who is not suited to sympathy for human beings, pay homage to the cows.
By Dan on June 26th, 2008 at 12:57 am
And I say, hail the Queen for stripping Mugabe of his knighthood. How often does that happen?
Would that she could say, “off with his head!”
(Sorry, John, for the political commentary.)
By Dan on June 26th, 2008 at 1:02 am
The Sun is reporting the William has joined HMS Iron Duke to start his 2-month attachment. Passengers saw him in his flight to Barbados. Looks like we’ll have a 2-month Willie drought
By the way, will he be away for 2 months or 5 weeks? I keep seeing conflicting stories.
By frands on June 26th, 2008 at 2:41 am
What I’ve read is that Prince William’s full attachment with the Royal Navy will be two months long (June 2 through August 1?), and that his time on the Royal Duke will be 5 weeks (June 25 through 30?).
By Evelyn on June 26th, 2008 at 3:26 am
He needs to be careful not to treat everything in his lot to be a bit of a joke.
I agree with you, Dan. Harry’s Achilles heel is to treat everything as a joke. The display at the Cardiff school was really over the top. He needs to be able to judge what’s appropriate for an occasion and what’s not.
By John on June 26th, 2008 at 9:57 am
Let Charles, who is not suited to sympathy for human beings, pay homage to the cows.
But Charles loves cows. He’s never happier than when inspecting rare breeds. He’s a farmer at heart, like George III.
By John on June 26th, 2008 at 10:01 am
Dan, we all cheered up when the removal of Mugabe’s Knighthood was announced. Apparently, it would have happened sooner but for Gordon Brown’s dithering. Plus ca change ..
By John on June 26th, 2008 at 10:03 am
Umm wasn’t Kate Middleton laughing as well as Harry, and was said to have said “oh my god” while giggling at William. If Harry was seem to be clowning about there, then so was Kate Middleton then.
By Belinda on June 26th, 2008 at 11:16 am
Belinda,
I don’t think the Garter Ceremony was too bad, they both had a pretty normal reaction to seeing William dressed like that but Harry just seemed to be a little OTT, while Kate was a little more reserved but I think it has more to do with their different personality types.
I don’t think Harry shouldn’t be open and friendly when meeting all the people who have turned up to greet him, that he shouldn’t joke around with the children but that he needs to be careful not to be too over the top about it, which he can tend to be on occasion. Having a reputation for being the joker in your twenties is all well and good but when it comes time to tackle serious issues later on in his life that reputation may come back to haunt him. He needs to remember that if he wants people to take him and his causes seriously then he is going to have to start acting a little more serious.
By Ash on June 26th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
I disagree with that Ash, if Harry was bad as you put it then so was Kate then. If we were to go on that logic all i’m saying is don’t blame Harry for laughing out loud and giggling when Kate was doing that also. From what I saw she wasn’t more reserved than Harry. So if we are to blame one for laughing then we should blame the other then. The same applies to those who have blamed Kate for laughing and giggling but don’t blame Harry. The fact it they were both seen laughing and giggling at William.
Not that think there is anything wrong with laughter.
By Belinda on June 26th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
As we said at the time, Kate just got caught up in Harry’s mirth, as did some of the others present. If Harry had remained solemn and serious, none of the other would have laughed.
By John on June 26th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
I’m not blaming Harry for laughing at any one occasion, or, for that matter, blaming anyone (and you’ll get no sight of me jumping on the Kate-bashing bandwagon). Let’s not pick one tree and lose the forest.
Harry’s behavior, anywhere it seems except in his Army uniform, suggests he considers his civilian Royal life to be a joke. Since no one wants his personality squelched, because that would only cause bigger problems, I’m saying his schedule should be planned around more activities and engagements that he truly cares about, and where he can do some good. Cows don’t do it for him. His heart seems to be on the front lines, but those folks behind the front lines, the wounded and the families of those fighting and wounded, might make better use of his jokes and smiles and at the same time keep those people in the public’s hearts and minds as well. I can’t speak for Britain, but in the US the grievously wounded and the veterans without proper care or benefits are rendered almost invisible. Harry’s high profile standing beside them can make forgetting them impossible.
Criticizing this one or that one for giggling is hardly the crux of the matter. My criticism, if you must call it that, is meant to be constructive, not destructive.
By Dan on June 26th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
Dan, I totally agree. That would give Harry his true vocation, in a direct line from his mother.
Are you listening, Clarence House.
By John on June 26th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
As I said I think they both had a pretty natural reaction to seeing William dressed like that. I know that there is so much history wrapped up in the Garter Ceremony but if my BF/brother walked down that hill dressed liked that I would have laughed too. What was different was the type of reaction they all had - Camilla had a big (proud) grin on her face, Kate laughed and had a big smile, even Sophie Wessex had a smile but Harry went that one bit further and was kicking his legs out, throwing his head back in laughter which I found a little over the top. It was great to see them all smiling and happy but as I said I think Harry just has to be careful not to take it too far. I really don’t think the reputation as the ‘Joker of the Family’ is one he is going to want later on in life.
By Ash on June 26th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
There is also the painful history, oft repeated, of the public’s lightning-quick turn against those Royals who once were praised for being a “fresh face” or a “modernizing influence”. Think of Princess Margaret, Diana, and the Duchess of York in the past half-century alone. (Marie-Antoinette once struck someone as a delightful “breath of fresh air”.)
Everyone loved their “joie de vivre”… until they didn’t love it at all.
I’m not saying Harry needs to turn it off like a spigot. By all means not. He just needs to channel it where it will do some good. The good looks, jokes, and easy smiles could bring joy to many who sorely need the comfort, where they won’t be dismissed as cock-eyed or inappropriate.
By Dan on June 26th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
As far as I know, this is the first time Harry ever represented the Firm at an agricultural show. It could be that those who plan the royal schedule would have preferred to send Charles, but Charles is in Wales and unable to be at Norfolk.
It also could be that they’re trying the boys out on a variety of events, to give them a chance to see how they do, so they can plan better. In another 25 years, it will be this new generation of royals who will be asked to do many of these engagements.
By Evelyn on June 26th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
True enough, Evelyn. While he may be better suited for some events than others, he’ll have to be all-purpose if he’s to maintain the public’s respect. He can’t be a one-trick pony. It’s the right balance that will bring out his best.
By Dan on June 26th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Maybe Clarence House insiders are listening to us, or are better- tuned than I give them credit for. The Prince of Wales’s website is playing up the fact that the British Army Chief of General Staff Sir Richard Dannatt, the guy who sent Harry to Afghanistan, happens to be the President of this year’s Royal Norfolk Show. The final lines are telling: “The show’s president General Sir Richard Dannatt said: “…I think he wants to be part of the home team, it’s fantastic to have him here.” “Sir Richard said he was delighted that two serving soldiers, himself and Prince Harry, had been invited to today’s event.”
So that’s why Harry was there. OK, I get it.
By Dan on June 26th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Sir Richard Dannatt is the best Chief of Staff the Army has had in a long while. He has always stood up for his soldiers against the cynical cuts made by the politicians.
When Harry was about to be sent to Iraq last year Royal Anecdotes published An Open Letter to General Sir Richard Dannatt. A week later Harry was pulled from the deployment.
By John on June 26th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
Sorry, I put the wrong link in the last comment. I’ve now corrected it on the site if anyone wants to follow it up.
By John on June 26th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Also could I just make a comment. Do we know for a fact that Kate and Harry were laughing at the exact moment that William was walking by? And not that they were having a joke about something earlier on and the press reported it that way? It’s just a thought as I remember reading in one paper that Kate just smiled as William walked by??? I understand that Harry could be a bit more serious at times but I just don’t know if he is being blamed for something unfairly??
By Jackie Mccoy on June 26th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
If I didn’t say so at the time, John, I respectfully disagree with the point of your letter to the General. I think it was important for Harry to go, and if it had been public knowledge at the time, I would have supported his deployment. I think that the tradition of Kings (or near Kings) leading their people in battle is one of the more noble. It legitimizes them (and ultimately proves or disproves them in the capacity) as leaders.
By Dan on June 26th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
Re: Pippa, George Percy and social climbing:
I believe the current Duchess, i.e., George’s mother, is the daughter of a Scottish barrister. Social climbing seems to be in George’s background.
By Ursula on June 26th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
In days when Lords and Ladies, Junior Countesses and Duchesses are thin on the ground, who are the likes of Earl Percy to marry? Would you prefer an arranged marriage with a daughter of the Duke down the road? There aren’t so many Dukes’ daughters anymore. Certainly not ones that they aren’t already bobbing a bit too closely to in the gene pool.
If Pippa winds up a Duchess, let’s not ascribe it to the worse angels of her nature. Besides, in the days when football and pop stars rule society, the whole concept of “social climbing” by marrying a Duke’s son is very 19th century.
By Dan on June 26th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Dan I have to disagree with you. I think it was crazy and very fool hardy for Harry to go to Iraq. It was very noble of him to want to go but he put the lives of every single one of his fellow officers at risk. Can you imagine what would have happened if they knew he was there and what lenghts they would have gone to, to get to him??? And if they had caputred him it would have been a national crisis. I’m not saying that he should be babied but I don’t think it was a sensible idea. Only yesterday I think you were saying that Harry shouldn’t hide from who is he and that is HRH and along with that come responsibility. Enough soliders have already been killed in this pointless war and the fact that hundreds more fathers brothers, sisters, mothers could have been killed just to get to him makes my stomach turn.
By Jackie Mccoy on June 26th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
Well, everyone’s life in the Army is at risk. I think the increased danger that Harry’s presence might have caused and the threat of his abduction were overplayed—the British Army isn’t that simple to prey on—and ultimately the facts on the ground bore that out. I think the people who now consider him a hero would agree with me. Those who would blame him for putting British lives at risk in order to “play soldier” are ignoring the military history of monarchy. It was a Norman Conquest, not a Norman Garden Party, that wrought these Kings and Queens.
This is just another example that proves the Royals can’t win: people will criticize them for sitting around, and then criticize them for standing up.
By Dan on June 26th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
And by the way, I am not being inconsistent in my comments. “That Harry shouldn’t hide from who he is and that is HRH, and along with that comes responsibility” is precisely my point. We can agree to disagree about what that responsibility is.
Further by the way, I am not a warmonger. I support the war in Afghanistan more than I do the bungled war in Iraq, but I would prefer that no one goes to war.
By Dan on June 26th, 2008 at 4:54 pm
I agree that Royals get criticized a lot Dan I don’t think that Harry would just have been play acting at being a soldier over in Iraq. Yes all soldiers lives are at risk being in Iraq but why even think about doubling the risk to everyone else’s lives by sending one high risk individual out there. It’s so selfish in my opinion…. But that’s just my opinion. It’s a moot point since it has already passed and hopefully will never happen again. What is Harry expected to do with the rest of his life?? I can’t remember what qualifications he has?
By Jackie Mccoy on June 26th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
I agree, Jackie, it ended well and is not likely to be repeated.
As for his future, as I’ve been saying, Harry’s “heroism” gives him legitimacy and a soapbox to stand on. I hope he’ll remain an advocate for those who serve their country (indeed, countries) honorably, and who deserve to be treated honorably when they return.
That will give him a meaningful role in the military that does not require active combat.
By Dan on June 26th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
I agree Dan that could be a very rewarding role for him, especially if it was to push for better after care for wounded soldiers once they return from war. There are so many things he could do with a role like that!!! Dan you could be on to something
By Jackie Mccoy on June 26th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
Lizzy and Carla, welcome to the site.
You may find it helpful to read our comment policy in the footer. It’s a bit complicated but necessary to keep the barbarians out.
By John on June 26th, 2008 at 6:54 pm
I’m not sure how reliable it is but according to The Sun William has begun his two-month tour of duty in the Caribbean with the Navy and was seen off by Kate.
Link: http://tinyurl.com/5kmqor
By Ash on June 26th, 2008 at 7:13 pm
John, thanks for the warm welcome. I’d love to get your opinion about Kate’s role, assuming she and William marry. Camilla is criticized by some royal watchers for not doing enough royal duties. But I thought it was made clear when she married that she would have a supporting role to Charles. Do you think Kate will have a similar supporting role to Prince William or will she have a higher profile?
By Lizzy on June 26th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
Lizzy, I believe Kate will be dutiful in support of William.
So far, she’s been careful not to get involved in much else, which will leave her free to adopt a fulltime role in the Royal Family.
Given her “future Queen” status if (when) that happens, she will need all her time available.
By John on June 26th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
Ash, that sounds authentic to me. So now we know he’s off for five weeks, and Kate will probably lie low, apart from a visit or two to Wimbledon. We’ve got our binoculars trained on the Royal Box.
Watch out on Saturday when Andy Murray plays in the 3rd round.
By John on June 26th, 2008 at 7:30 pm
You didn’t ask me Lizzy, but for myself, I’d expect to see Camilla and Catherine, in their due time, as much as you see their current place-holder, the Duke of Edinburgh. No one wants to see a lonesome King walking about. Imagine the rumors it would start about the state of his marriage!
They say Camilla won’t be crowned Queen—she’ll be called a Princess Consort or somesuch (although they refuse to call her a Princess now). But I can’t imagine a Queen (by any other name, still a Queen) staying on the sidelines successfully. Surely William’s wife will be crowned Queen and be by his side most of the time. There’s a lot to do, and it can’t all be done by half the team.
By Dan on June 26th, 2008 at 7:34 pm
Dan, I think Camilla will be crowned Queen, and rightly so. It would be a kind of accusation of inadequacy were she not. Charles won’t have that and he will be the King.
It will help if William and Kate are married then, so the public can see the future.
By John on June 26th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
Ahh the thought. I really don’t like Camilla. John didn’t you say a long time ago that if Charles became King and Camilla Queen that there was a chance of Australia and possibly New Zealand defecting?
By Jackie Mccoy on June 26th, 2008 at 7:56 pm
John & Dan,
That’s exactly what I was thinking. I’m an American, but I always thought the Queen Consort’s job was to support her husband the King. That’s the traditional role and there’s nothing wrong with that. It seems like Princess Diana was the first to try and change that? And Prince Charles and other members of the family didn’t like it? Sorry for all the questions, but you all give such great answers!
By Lizzy on June 26th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
Thanks Jonh.
I always read the posts but I never post one because of my English, as you can see. This is the only site where comments have sense, specially about Kate. But why my first comment/testament wasn’t posted? Sorry if I exceeded the limit - in number of words and the way I’ve used to refere about Pippa - but I just wanted to defend Kate , who I like very much as I said, and her family. What could I do if Pippa doesn’t seem me worthy and if I think it isn’t right say that Kate and the rest of the family are like her? I was impolite while the others can call her social climber?
PS: If you will not post this at least answer me. Because I don’t understand why.
By Carla on June 26th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
Well it was announced when they got married that Camilla will become Princess Consort. She and the Queen and Prince Charles agreed on that. She has no interest in becoming Queen.
By Rman on June 26th, 2008 at 7:59 pm
I can just picture Australia and New Zealand throwing their napkins down on the table, getting up in huff, spluttering “well, we never!” and stomping out.
Reigneth Camilla, wither the Commonwealth!
She’s already proven that she looks rather smart in a tiara, I say let her have it. She’s proven her mettle, and anyway, there’s something a bit louche about a woman being called a consort.
By Dan on June 26th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
Carla, I didn’t see your post in the moderation panel. But in any case we don’t like personal attacks, especially on those who are not directly involved with Royalty.
Pippa has not done anyone any harm, so why should people who don’t know her attack her?
By John on June 26th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Jackie, if Charles becomes King, Australia and New Zealand may well vote for a republic. I don’t think Camilla will make much difference. The republicans will use it as an excuse to ditch the Monarchy. So be it.
If William and Kate succeed the Queen, we simply don’t know the outcome. All this is out of Britain’s hands
By John on June 26th, 2008 at 8:10 pm
Dan, the Commonwealth is an outdated construction anyway. Britain loses right down the line by it.
The Anglosphere will continue, even if Australia nad NZ drop the Monarchy. That’s what matters.
By John on June 26th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Pippa Percy…. If Kate’s going to reign as Catherine, Pippa ought to consider following suit. I forget—is her given name Philippa?
Alnwick, the Duke of Northumberland’s pile up north, is the 2nd largest castle in England, after you-know-which (hint: there’s a Royal Family in England named after it.) Perfect for a second daughter.
I hope Pippa likes the north better than Chelsy appears to. Then again, the Percys have a smashing house in London also.
By Dan on June 26th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Dan you have a point there. If Kate marries William could you imagine if she married someone who wasn’t titled/an aro. You could just see the headline “sizzler sister slums it with ____”
Good luck to Pippa I say who whom ever she chooses, as the sister of the future Queen (possibly) she will need to choose well/sensibly. Where did this talk about George Percy start. I thought he was just a friend?? Or am I being Naive??
By Jackie Mccoy on June 26th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
Jackie,
Me too. They wouldn’t need to lie about- neither are married. And last I heard Pippa was still dating the banking heir.
By Lizzy on June 26th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
I have no information. I’m merely entertaining the thought of Queen Catherine and her sister the Duchess of Northumberland. It’s very Jane Austen. (Although, given that George Percy’s father the Duke is only 52, Pippa would be waiting almost as long as Catherine for her keys to the castle.)
The Percys eagerly let out their London home, Syon Park (one of the most spectacular houses in Britain) for parties and weddings. Think how perfectly Pippa would be at running that show.
By Dan on June 26th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
Lizzy Pippa spilt up with JJ Jardine the banking heir last year. they don’t have any reason to lie about it other than trying to stay out of the lime light and laying low until Kate gets her moment to shine?
I’m not sure how much of a fuss dating George Percy would create other than the usual social climbling barbs & stiring up the old story that Pippa was always in love with George while she was dating JJ. … Maybe that is enough of a reason….. & at this point in time with things graduly falling into place for Kate I’m sure her sister & brother are under strict instructions from her parents not to rock the boat under any circumstances….
By Jackie Mccoy on June 26th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
FYI, Pippa attended a Sotheby’s bash last week with George Percy, hence the new chatter about them. That blip, reported in the Daily Mail on June 20th, is actually the source of John’s piece at the top of this string.
And voila, we’ve come full circle. G’night!
By Dan on June 26th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
Here are some pictures of the Sotheby’s event from the Getty Images website. The bottom right hand photograph is very cute, she looks most similar to Kate in that picture.
http://tinyurl.com/6ym2tx
By Jackie Mccoy on June 26th, 2008 at 10:07 pm
Jackie, Pippa and JJ Jardine-Paterson reconciled last year. JJ was the cute guy with the dimples wearing the white shirt and seated next to Pippa at the Concert for Diana. He was also with Pippa at Kate’s photo exhibition for Unicef in November of last year, and I saw photos of Pippa and JJ together (on another site) at someone’s very lovely country seat (huge mansion) for Hogmanay in Scotland. Now whether they’ve broken up again since New Year’s, I don’t know.
I did read, however, that the reason they even broke up in the very first place was because of Pippa and George’s close friendship!
Of course I have no way of knowing if it’s true, but I read that Pippa and George have always had a sort of extremely close, almost flirtatious friendship at uni. Pippa, George and Ted (Innes-Kerr) were flatmates for 3 years while they were at uni. During the whole time Pippa was dating JJ, and George was dating someone also.
JJ himself is nothing to sneeze at (he’s tall, cute, and has dimples), but possibly George and Pippa have some sort of inescapable attraction to each other? JJ is supposedly a fun guy, and his family is old and well established. His family has actually had several movies made about them, including “Taipan” and “Gai Gin”. The family (clan) seat is in Scotland, they’ve had money since the 1800’s, and they’re literally as rich as Croesus.
So if Pippa and JJ did break up again and she is seeing George, (I’m not saying she is, just speculating) maybe she and George have some sort of attraction they just haven’t been able to walk away from?
Either way, I think Pippa must be a charming and fun person to be friends with, similar to her sister Kate. Pippa was the flatmate of two Duke’s sons for 3 years at uni; they must’ve felt like she was both a good egg and a trustworthy person to be their flatmate.
By mapleleaf on June 26th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
If/when Kate marries Prince William and becomes the future Queen of England, the Percys may push George at Pippa instead of the other way around. Being married to the sister of the future Queen can be very intoxicating. Proximity to the throne is a very valuable commodity.
By Arthur on June 27th, 2008 at 12:22 am
My thinking exactly, Arthur. And if George and Pippa start with a strong friendship, that could lead to a happy and stable marriage.
By Evelyn on June 27th, 2008 at 3:37 am
Isn’t George Percy a descendent of Henry Percy who once engaged to Anne Boleyn? George and Pippa look nice in photos, just like William and Kate!
By Mikado-watcher on June 27th, 2008 at 6:36 am
Yes, Dan, and all those angsty teenage girls wouldn’t find it so easy to write their hate stuff about Queen Catherine and the Duchess of Northumberland.
By John on June 27th, 2008 at 9:54 am
That’s true, Mapleaf. Jardine Mathieson was the company that practically ran Hong Kong in the early days. It made a fortune in banking and trade with the Orient. Although times have been harder lately, there’s still a pile of value tucked away under the name.
By John on June 27th, 2008 at 10:04 am
Mikado Watcher, the Percy family, as Dukes of Northumberland, go back to William the Conqueror (1066). They have been at the heart of history for most of the time since.
In the 18th and part of the 19th centuries, England was run by 10 fabulously-wealthy Dukedoms — see the novels of Anthony Trollope. One of them was Northumberland.
Now we get Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.
And George Percy is best known for dating Pippa Middleton.
By John on June 27th, 2008 at 10:10 am
Arthur and Evelyn, I was just thinking the same thing. Aristocrats would love their son to be marrying the sister of the future Queen of England.
I’m not accusing either sister of social climbing but one could wonder how they both got into a position where they shared accomodation with either the heir to the throne or the heirs to two dukedoms at university when most people are just trying to find their way to the canteen.
Of course they are lovely girls no denying that but there are alot of lovely girls out there who don’t find themselves in that enviable position.
My own view is that they were relaxed enough in that rarefied environment due to their public schooling and to the nice home in the Berkshires not to feel inferior or under pressure but had none of the angst of the broken home or poor little rich girl syndrome that a lot of those girls would have.
Its actually the very stable middleclass background the jealous upper class slag off that has put them in the position where the world is that their feet. More power to them.
By Eliza on June 27th, 2008 at 10:10 am
I totally agree, Eliza, plus the fact that Kate was described by a teacher as “amazingly bright”. That, combined with a very relaxed manner, would make them hugely attractive to genuinely upper-class men who are more used to the flighty, faux-superiority of girls of their own class.
By John on June 27th, 2008 at 10:16 am
Call me old fashioned but I think the stunning looks of both girls would attract the men more than the intelligence!!
But I do agree John, they would be a breath of fresh air after the usual self absorbed aristocrat.
By Eliza on June 27th, 2008 at 10:24 am
When I spoke of the relative rarity of Dukes’ daughters, I had not considered Rosie Innes-Ker, one of the two daughters of the Duke of Roxburghe, who also appears in those Getty images at the Sotheby’s party. John, do you consider her to exemplify the “flighty, faux-superiority of girls of their own class”? I don’t know anything about her, but that’s she’s already engaged.
She works for Sotheby’s. Perhaps she could find a spot for Catherine. Although it was once said that, while Christie’s is comprised of gentlemen trying to be auctioneers, Sotheby’s is a bunch of auctioneers trying to be gentlemen. Perhaps the auction business is too much a commercial enterprise for a future Queen.
Isn’t Viscount Linley the head of Christie’s?
By Dan on June 27th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Dan, I wasn’t pointing a finger at particular individuals, just a general trend of some girls to behave badly.
I’m not sure Kate is looking for a job right now. She seems to have one at home where she’s much safer and out of the public eye.
By John on June 27th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
Indeed, at home photographing partyware. Ugh. God bless her.
By Dan on June 27th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Any comment on the Royal finance report, John? I say they’re worth it (we’ve had this discussion before), but it is a bit astonishing that taking the Royal Train from Windsor to Manchester for a two-day trip costs over 18,000 pounds.
It should be noted that indeed, the money is spent, but it goes back into the British economy. After all, that money is being paid to Britons. One can’t say the same about the Duke of York’s £57,670 spent on trips within Brazil, but allegedly he is promoting investment in Britain on all those trips.
What does it cost to shuttle Gordon Brown around the country as his government crumbles about his ankles?
By Dan on June 27th, 2008 at 4:27 pm
Hello!
I just had a couple of questions about Mr. Brown. I’m not exactly sure how the British Government works, but it seems a lot easier to just about get someone out of office. It seems like Mr. Brown’s term will be incredibly short. How does the office of Prime Minister work exactly? Just how bad of a job is he doing - or at least considered to be doing?
Thanks
By Anne on June 27th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
Do any of our British members here know the best paper for accurate royal news? The Daily Mail seems to be wrong a lot. I used to like the Telegraph but recently they’ve just been repeating mindless gossip from the DM. We have Tatler here in America but it’s like $10 per issue! So I don’t get to buy it regularly. Thoughts?
By Lizzy on June 27th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
The Queen is the Head of State of the United Kingdom. At 66p per taxpayer per year (just over $1) that represents exceptional value, especially when set against the enormous tourist numbers that come to see the Queen and the Palaces.
What is the cost per taxpayer of the U.S. Presidency, Dan?
By John on June 27th, 2008 at 5:59 pm
Kate Middleton has just turned up at the Nelson Mandela 90th birthday concert in Hyde Park, London. I hope to get some pictures later.
By John on June 27th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
Anne, Gordon Brown is a nightmare. He was Chancellor for 10 year under Blair and his efforts are now seen to be crumbling into debt and dust.
As PM, he is hopelessly out of touch. He will definitely lose the next election, which has to be held before early June 2010. He can, of course, call it any time, but that’s unlikely since he’s the most unpopular PM since polls began in 1944.
By John on June 27th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
Lizzy, the Daily Mail has the most comprehensive coverage and is generally reliable — although they do get some things wrong. It’s not deliberate though, just speculation where facts are not known. Here at RA we try to signal where the facts are not known, so any story is just guesswork.
By John on June 27th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
Wow! That’s not good…
Thanks for the explanation John!
By Anne on June 27th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
John, thank you for answering my question. I’ve got “Percy” from The Other Boleyn Girl but I certainly need to read Trollopes’s books too!
By Mikado-watcher on June 27th, 2008 at 6:22 pm
I’m confused about the royal finances. How could the costs have increased? Does the RF not get a fixed budget? Are they simply given whatever amount of money they request for their engagements?
By Isana on June 27th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
Isana, like all organizations, there are variable costs as well as fixed ones. Inflation is rampant right now, so certain costs have risen.
However, if you take the income from the Royal Estates — now paid to the Treasury — plus the inward flows from tourism related to the Monarchy, it is in fact massively in surplus. That is, the cost is a negative one to the taxpayer.
How many other Heads of State around the world can say that?
By John on June 27th, 2008 at 6:35 pm
John, while Gigi will probably disagree with me, I would say that the cost to the United States of our current president cannot be measured in dollars and cents. (or sense, for that matter.) Sorry Gigi, I’m one of those over-educated New England elitist Democrats.
As for Royal expenses, the costs go up like everything else. With the current rise in prices for everything from apples to oil (Royals have to eat and heat, like everyone else), I can’t wait to see next year’s report!
By Dan on June 27th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
That’s awesome John,I can’t wait to see the pictures of Kate at the concert!!!
By Jackie Mccoy on June 27th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
And yes, John, the Royals as major tourist attractions is part of my argument for them as well. They more than pay for themselves.
By Dan on June 27th, 2008 at 6:44 pm
John,
Re royal finances: Are there any rules governing how Prince Charles can spend his income from the Duchy or who he can spend the money on? And even though the Queen has her own private wealth she can still use the income from the Duchy of Lancaster?
By Lizzy on June 27th, 2008 at 6:51 pm
There are a couple pictures of Kate at Gettyimages.com. Search “Kate Middleton” and they come right up. Any identifying who she’s with?
By Dan on June 27th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
The blond next to her could be Holly Branson.
By Isana on June 27th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
Dan, the cost of the Presidency — according to Joseph Stiglitz — is three trillion dollars. A little bit more than 80 mill for the Queen.
Long live Her Majesty.
By John on June 27th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
Getty Images
http://tiny.cc/QoShC
By Jackie Mccoy on June 27th, 2008 at 7:13 pm
Completely off point but I have to share coz I’m all excited- I’m heading for a vacation in your part of the world Dan.
I spent a year in Portland, Maine years ago and am going back in September with my family to catch up with old friends and have the picture card new England beach holiday. It should be great I can’t wait!
By Eliza on June 27th, 2008 at 7:13 pm
She is with Holly Branson but I don’t know who the guy she is sitting next to is?
By Jackie Mccoy on June 27th, 2008 at 7:14 pm
Lizzy, the Duchy of Cornwall is a business, so is governed by business rules. Charles plays a flat rate 25pc tax on his income, compared with most businesses which have sweetheart deals with the Treasury and shift money offshore.
The Queen is the Duke of Lancaster, so has access to the Duchy’s income. Its Chancellor is a government minister who is widely regarded as a minister without portfolio. She is entitled to use its income however she wishes. Her private wealth is just that — private.
By John on June 27th, 2008 at 7:14 pm
It may be Holly Branson’s boyfriend, Hugh Crossley, but can’t be sure.
By John on June 27th, 2008 at 7:19 pm
John, three trillion dollars is the total amount collected in US taxes in 2007. That funds the entire government, including the military, not just the presidency. Bush costs us a lot (like I said, unaccountable), but not that much!
I’m trying to track down a White House budget. As it Britain, it won’t include security costs, as those are borne by the US Treasury Department, which oversees the Secret Service.
By Dan on June 27th, 2008 at 7:21 pm
The 3 trill, Dan, is Stiglitz’s estimate of the cost of the Iraq war, not the cost of the Presidency. It was a “humorous” comment.
By John on June 27th, 2008 at 7:23 pm
From The Observer:
Hon Hugh Crossley, 29
Head of family: Lord Somerleyton
Will inherit £25 million
Hugh Crossley was a page of honour to the Queen from 1983 to 1984. He now stands to inherit a Suffolk estate near Lowestoft, which runs to about 5,000 acres, making it worth at least £15m at the going rate of £3,000 per acre - ignoring the development potential. There is a member of the Hoare banking family in the ancestry and there are extensive family trusts going back several years.
By John on June 27th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
Yes, humorous—as in absurd, not funny! And the costs are still mounting.
As for your Republicans, do they think the costs will simply disappear if the Royal Family is put out? The Palaces would still have to be kept up, unless the plan is to convert them to luxury flats.
By Dan on June 27th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
We’d probably have President Blair whose wife alone would cost more than 40 mill a year.
We Royalists are holding out for the David Cameron era in two years time. We’re hoping for a generation of it.
By John on June 27th, 2008 at 7:45 pm
While we—or at least, a lot of us in the states—are looking forward to CHANGE as well.
Sadly, when the generation has passed, we’ll probably both wind up disappointed. Politicians are politicians.
As you said, Long live the Queen.
By Dan on June 27th, 2008 at 7:59 pm
Eliza, I just back from vacation in Maine too! It was mostly gray and chilly but so refreshing ( I live in VA). I enjoyed lobsters and blueberry beer a lot. \(^0^)/ I’m sure you’ll have a great time there .
By Mikado-watcher on June 27th, 2008 at 8:10 pm
Hello,
This may be a silly question, but I’ve always wondered…
when in the royal family, I’m sure that there is some degree of normalcy in that you can call someone up, call them Aunt/Uncle or whatever without the formality. However, I wonder if there is some sort of protocol, even for them, which requires that they make some sort of appointment before just dropping by to say hello - esp. to the Queen. Plus, when would they be required to call each other by their proper titles - just in formal circumstances when viewed by other people, esp. the public/media? I ask b/c it seems as if whenever people in movies about royalty (old) talk to each other, they are addressed by their formal titles. How accurate is that?
Thanks
By Anne on June 27th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
I agree, politicians disappoint and disappear, but HM goes on forever.
I like Obama, he’s bright and sunny. It’s just his similarity with the young Tony Blair that worries me. Blair bombed big time on all fronts.
By John on June 27th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
My only hope for Obama, and for Hillary if she has a role to play, is that, as firsts in power in our country (first African/American, first woman) they realize they have a serious interest in NOT screwing up. Surely Blair and Brown stepped into the big shoes believing fully in their own magnificence and expecting the rest of Britain to fall in behind them (just like Bush and Cheney, never considering the possibility of being wrong or inept.)
Both Obama and Hillary know they have to prove themselves worthy to a skeptical (though hopeful) nation, and one hopes they will work that much harder to get things right.
Frankly, I say they can’t be worse than what we’ve got right now! Of course, many may have said that about Gordon Brown.
By Dan on June 27th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
Hey I’m not sure Dan if this is what you were talking about but on the Sky news website on the newspapers front pages for tomorrow morning there seems to be a story about the Queen being annoyed at living in a patch and mend existance as the palace disintergrates around her and that she only has 320 Million pounds left. John what do you make of this?? That seem like more than eough money to me but, I’m also not sure what her out going costs per year are??
By Jackie Mccoy on June 27th, 2008 at 9:35 pm
Link to the article which maybe just nonsense??
http://tinyurl.com/49k6vm
By Jackie Mccoy on June 27th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
The Hon. Hugh Crossley is dating Jecca Craig, and he’s been dating Jecca since 2005. There is a photo of Jecca sitting on Hugh’s lap at the Boodles Boxing Ball 3 weeks ago, he is wearing the boxing shorts he fought (and lost) in.
I don’t know who Holly Branson is dating, but as pretty as she is, I hope it’s someone who’s really nice. I think it’s great that Kate and Holly attended the concert honouring Nelson Mandela’s birthday! I saw some of the live streaming video, the music was just fantastic!
By mapleleaf on June 27th, 2008 at 9:55 pm
& Getty images have updated the photograps of Kate at the concert. There are a number of gentlemen talking to her that I don’t recognize…. But she seems to have had fun
By Jackie Mccoy on June 27th, 2008 at 10:19 pm
Guys I was kind of shocked to read that Kensington Palace apartments 8-9 that belonged to Diana is now becoming the base for Charles’s charities but I guess that is good since William & Harry is not planning to live there again. I guess St. James’s Palace will become William & Catherine’s city base next year.
By Rman on June 27th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
Jackie, the Palaces have been poory maintained since Labour got into power, just as the Armed forces have been starved of funds to fight the politicians’ wars.
The 320 mill number is an estimate of the Queen’s personal worth — though an underestimate on some measures. She is not responsible for paying for these things, the Government is, and it is failing to do so.
However, I’m sure they will raise the money somehow, even if by shaming our pygmy politicians who overspend on everything else.
By John on June 27th, 2008 at 11:04 pm
I’ve just noticed some pictures on gossip girls website of Kate out with friends after the Mandela concert. She doesn’t look too happy about being snapped though! Even though I love checking out her outfits I can only imagine how irratating it must be.
By Siobhan on June 28th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Some photographs of Kate at Wimbeldon: http://tinyurl.com/6r2xk5
By Ash on June 28th, 2008 at 7:41 pm
Thanks, Ash. I thought she would be there for the Andy Murray match, but I didn’t spot her in the Royal Box in the BBC coverage.
The Royal Box at Wimbledon is not like the same at Royal Ascot. It’s more like the VIP Box and doesn’t depend on an invitation from the Queen.
Not sure from the shots whether Kate was in the Royal Box at all.
By John on June 28th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
She didn’t seem to have any sort of VIP pass around her neck like they usually wear at similar events, so mabye she was just seated in the normal section. I wonder who the people were that she was with. They didn’t look familiar to me?
By jackie Mccoy on June 28th, 2008 at 9:18 pm
I also checked the Wimbledon website Royal Box page & they made no reference to Kate being in the Royal box.
By jackie Mccoy on June 28th, 2008 at 9:21 pm
Article about Kate turning down invitation to go to Sandringham for Christmas.
http://tinyurl.com/3lpe9k
By jackie Mccoy on June 29th, 2008 at 2:35 am
Another DM article just about the concert and Kate
http://tinyurl.com/4utvhd
By jackie Mccoy on June 29th, 2008 at 2:40 am
Why does the Christmas story sound like the other Christmas stories from before? Somehow I don’t believe that someone would know this kind of information.
By Rman on June 29th, 2008 at 3:35 am
Here’s another new artical from the Telegraph on Prince William.
http://tinyurl.com/4qbbw8
By Rman on June 29th, 2008 at 3:51 am
Hmmm I wonder what John will make of the telegraph article. I don’t necessarily think that it points to anything to do with the engagement but maybe John will be able to shed some light…
By jackie Mccoy on June 29th, 2008 at 4:45 am
I wonder what John will make of the telegraph article.
Jackie, there are two new pieces up today that answer your question.
By John on June 29th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
I’m going to go out on a limb and predict that an American will win the Wimbledon Ladies Championship on Saturday.
Happy Independence Day to all those celebrating this great holiday! 
By Arthur on July 4th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Imagine the problems if we ruled America still. So happy Independence Day to us too.
By John on July 4th, 2008 at 2:58 pm