Kate Middleton and a possible 2009 wedding
The News of the World has an article in today’s edition about Prince William’s “future training” to be King. If we bear in mind that the past three years of military service were a crucial part of that preparation, there’s nothing really new in this piece.
Normally the NOTW doesn’t have the best reputation for Royal stories, but this assessment has authority as it’s written by Robert Jobson, author of the excellent book William’s Princess.
There’s a broad hint in the piece that the Prince may not have time for a wedding next year because of his busy schedule learning to be a Monarch. Every year will be a hectic one for William from now on, so this is a bit disingenuous. He will have to find time somewhere along the line. Next year will probably be less arduous than most simply because he will be learning rather than doing the job full-time. It’s much easier to find a gap in a period of study than when carrying out engagements planned two years in advance.
Jobson lists William’s new schedule:
* Working at different Whitehall departments and being shown the inner workings of government by Privy Councillors, including former Prime Minister John Major.
* Lessons in the job of being King by constitutional experts such as Oxford don Dr Vernon Bogdanor.
* Learning to manage the Duchy of Cornwall, the landed trust he will inherit from Charles when his father becomes King.
* Running the Sandringham Estate — a job his grandfather Prince Philip has been doing for years.
* Solo tours of the Commonwealth, taking some of that burden from the Queen.
An aide is quoted as saying, “For the first time we have an established Monarch, an active and experienced Heir to the Throne and in Prince William and Prince Harry real youth appeal. The Prince Of Wales has had a long time to prepare for what will probably be a relatively short reign. Prince William has effectively got to get to grips with the job very quickly. It is a very different world to when the Queen ascended the Throne and she wants him to be prepared for what is to come. William too wants to make sure he is ready for any challenge that’s thrown at him.”
All this we have known for some time. Most of these activities can be accomplished fairly quickly, given the knowledge already gained over 26 years of being a Prince while watching his father and his grandmother performing their duties. Much of what William will need will be on-the-job experience — actually doing it for himself.
There has also been talk of him working in a newspaper office. It will be an asset for him to experience the difficulties involved in gathering, fact-checking, writing and publishing news stories to exceptionally short deadlines. It will allow him to be less censorious of the hard-working hacks who bring us the latest on … himself, for example. He will also understand the need to provide the press and broadcast media with unambiguous lines of information. Putting a heavy spin on every story quickly dissipates the credibility of the messenger.
Jobson quotes a senior courtier, “A key skill for him to learn, the Queen believes, is to disguise his feelings, like politicians. His father has never really managed to achieve this.”
William and Kate are expected to take a three-week break when his Royal Navy secondment finishes next week. I don’t imagine he will want to fly back to the Caribbean so soon after his deployment, so we may hear of a fresh destination for their holiday. I’m told Montana is very refreshing at this time of the year.
The article serves as a useful reminder of William’s schedule for the next two years. One thing’s for sure, there’s no obvious reason to postone that much anticipated Royal wedding.
The military should have taught Prince William how to make crisp decisions. Now is the time for crispness. Limpness is not an option.
I read the same thing in the Telegraph. Except they didn’t have that “stupid” theory about having to wait to get married. I prefer to believe those who expect an annonsement within the next six months or so.
I mean, they just can’t expect Kate to “hide” for two more years, can they? I don’t think that would reflect so well on William. And it’s not fair to her. Let her get some training for her job also!
By dagga on July 27th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
dagga,
Exactly. I was surprised when I read the theory about a 2010 wedding in the NOTW story. It didn’t make any sense. As John said Prince William will always have a busy schedule from next year until the rest of his life. This is also the first time I’ve heard such a theory. Most other newspapers, The Telegraph, Evening Standard etc, have all reported an engagement was likely to happen later this year or by the spring of next year. So far only the NOTW has anything different.
By lizzy on July 27th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
Agreed! It seemed to me that the News of the World story was an attempt to make an old story fresh and marketable. Except for the supposition that the wedding must be postponed until 2010 (and unless NOTW has a true insider at the Palace or Clarence House, how could they possibly know this), there was nothing in the article that has not been known for some time. I certainly agree that it is to everyone’s advantage that Prince William have as much training as possible for his kingship, but that hardly precludes marriage. I personally think that postponing the Royal Wedding until 2010 would be a mistake, but I rather doubt that my views will be consulted by anyone directly concerned.
By Gigi on July 27th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
Well, they should listen to us, shouldn’t they;)
By dagga on July 27th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
I agree Gigi, I think it would be a disaster for Kate. She has already as Dagga mentioned hidden for so long & to expect her & her family to do so for another two years would be extremly selfish of William. The anti-Kate movement inside the palace would be out of control, as well as the press. I don’t think she would have any credability left. I agree also that it would not cast a favorable light on William,& if he lost her it would be his own fault.
By Jackie McCoy on July 27th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
Jackie,
Funny you mention the anti-Kate movement within the palace. Mr. Jobson cites a Buckingham Palace source for that information about the wedding being in 2010, not Clarence House. And there was an Express article that came out after Kate’s surprise appearance at Lady Rose’s wedding that mentioned a BP source explaining how Kate was not representing William but was a friend of Lady Rose and George. That’s why she was invited. Don’t you think we would have known before if Kate had a friendship with Lady Rose Gilman? Are you seeing the same pattern I am? Someone is attempting to downplay any notion of Kate playing a larger role in Prince William’s life.
By lizzy on July 27th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
It seems odd to me too to quote BP sources for inside knowledge on William and Kate and their future plans. How would they know? Theoretically CH personell may overhear some things but how someone working in BP would know is beyond me. Sure BP would need to be involved in any planning of a wedding but if no such planning takes place- as they say – how can they have any information on William’s love life and his engagement plans?
There seem to be quite a lot of articles out today and they sound rather contradictory. The Daily Star writes William and Kate will marry next summer and NOTW writes it’s 2010. Looks like someone needs to check their royal sources. I am more inclined to believe this is a way to fill the summer whole. Slow news day apparently.
By Isana on July 27th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
It’s the Silly Season, Isana. Everyone on holiday so not much gossip around.
Beware the Daily Star. It’s part of the Express group which was recently found guilty of making up stories about the McCann’s and others, including Diana over a 10 year period.
The NOTW has Robert Jobson writing, so that will ensure at least a bit of truth-telling, although I think he’s made the wrong call on the date of the wedding.
By John on July 27th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
Am I the only one who thinks a 2010 (or later) wedding isn’t such a bad thing? Perhaps it’s because I have always thought 2009 was too good to be true, and that 2010-12 sounds more realistic. Don’t get me wrong… I’d love to see the two get hitched, but always believed 2009 was a bit optimistic. Why? Mainly because of their age I think. 27 is a bit young for a royal to get married these days, and none of their friends in the same age group has started to get married.
Secondly, I think William is the kind of guy who plans his life carefully… perhaps 5-10 years in advance. So I’m sure Kate is aware of his plans and knows where she stands. Maybe it’s just the media that’s branding her as the helpless waiting girlfriend.
Third, I believe marriage is a huge adjustment in itself, and it would be smoother if William himself has had more solid experience in his royal role. Let me point out that this “royal apprenticeship” sounds like a good idea, with or without marriage.
The only major disadvantage I can see for delaying a wedding is Kate — the eternal question of “what will she do while she waits.” But perhaps William’s apprenticeship will indirectly train her as well as I’m sure they confide in each other. And perhaps she can be involved in the more personal aspects, such as managing the Duchy of Cornwall or Sandringham. Or be more exposed in garden parties and other social events when accompanying William. The media will continue to call her names, for sure, but perhaps it’ll prepare her in the best way possible for the life ahead. This may be the kind of preparation Diana and Fergie needed but never had.
Sorry for the long post… just my 2 cents. Am sure you knowledgeable folks will have a lot to add.
By frands on July 27th, 2008 at 4:24 pm
frands,
My only concern would be Kate having no protection. If she and William were to set up house together at St. James’s Palace or even Clarence House and Prince William makes it very clear that he is looking after her then I suppose that wouldn’t be so bad. It is important that whatever their plans are that William is not seen to be leaving Kate in limbo, with no defined role.
By lizzy on July 27th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
The age of 27 may be seen as young for some, but from the standpoint of beginning a family, to wait too much longer creates undue pressure. The current wisdom is that the risks of child bearing are lessened if it is accomplished by the time the mother is 35 years of age. Since Kate and Prince William are approximately the same age, a situation far different from that of Charles and Princess Diana, who was much younger than her husband, the timetable takes on added importance. If Kate and Prince William wish to have two or perhaps three children, they will need a minimum of six years (prior to age 35) to achieve this, barring the possibility of a multiple birth. Time, it seems, continues to march right along! While it may not signify to the staff of NOTW, these considerations are of great importance.
By Gigi on July 27th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
Of all of the articles read there is only one thing new. That is the date of a wedding. Most things hve been said before- William will finish military service, work in a gov’t office, possibly in the media. I do hope that William took the 5 weeks apart from Kate to figure out just what he wants to do regarding their future. I do think with all of the negative press that she is getting something needs to be said on her behalf. I don’t see anything wrong with them getting engaged and marrying in a year. I thought that I read somewhere that William wanted to cut his service time down for the wedding. Even if they got engaged at the end of their vacation, a wedding could be arranged late in July. That would give him six months to start his training.
By kat on July 27th, 2008 at 7:37 pm
Kat has an observation worth discussing:
“I don’t see anything wrong with them getting engaged and marrying in a year.”
I wonder if William and Kate should have something to say about this?
WHAT’S THE RUSH?!
It may be 25 years before William takes the throne! Is there a legitimate reason he MUST be married before he turns 28?
Yes, I do have a problem with Kate not having a perceivable position to occupy her time, and I don’t like that she is on her own regarding security. These are two legitimate points in favor of her being brought into the family in some regard. Is there no other recourse than a quickie wedding?
Marriage is a solemn vow! And the Royal Family has proven what a perilous landscape it presents to a couple that is not ready for marriage, or indeed, that is marrying for all the wrong reasons. William marrying Kate quickly so she can have a real job and a bodyguard is no better rationale than Charles marrying Diana because she was well-born and a virgin. If it is to be a real marriage, it must be for LOVE. And when, inevitably, the bloom comes off that love, there must be a profound abiding bond of friendship—even oneness, if you believe in such a thing— between them that only time and experience can forge. Half of all marriages fail because they never should have happened from the start.
I think we RA’ers need to be honest with one another. We are all stoking for an announcement because WE WANT TO WATCH A ROYAL WEDDING ON TELEVISION, DAMMIT!! We want to see the horses, the carriages, the cathedral, the trumpets, the pageantry, and most of all, the DRESS!!!
Well you know what? William will have a beautiful, fairy-tale wedding, in front of 2 billion adoring subjects around the world, no matter when and with whom it happens. But then he and his bride are going to close the door behind them and have to live with each other IN PUBLIC for 50 years or more. THEY DAMNED WELL BETTER BE READY FOR IT! Charles and Diana proved that you cannot make a happy marriage armed solely with the hopes and blessings of the spectators. William and whoever he marries should take all the time they need, even if takes YEARS, to be sure they are ready for their future together. A beautiful fairy-tale wedding provides a couple hours of bliss for all of us. But a hasty marriage arranged to placate the masses, but which is not grounded in a stout love for one another, can lead to far more than a couple hours or years of anger, sadness, disillusion, and even tragedy.
We will see a wedding with horses, carriages, cathedral, trumpets, pageantry, and a beautiful dress soon enough. But not too soon, I hope, to assure the real fairy tale this time.
William may be reading all your exhortations in favor of an announcement NOW and wondering, “didn’t my parents tragic marriage teach these people anything?”
By Dan on July 27th, 2008 at 11:37 pm
Dan,
I’m in agreement with all you have said. However, William and Kate have been seeing each other for 4 1/2 years now. The two have had a friendship for longer than that. They know by now if they have the kind of love that will make for a lasting marriage or not. If at this stage either of them are still unsure then that is the answer right there. If it is William with those doubts then he should allow Kate to move on with her life & he should start looking for the woman he can commit to. I would also add that if Prince William did not intend for marriage to be a part of his future with Kate it was very unwise of him to resume their relationship last year- and not just resume it, but invite more speculation by having Kate at such prominent royal events.
By lizzy on July 28th, 2008 at 12:20 am
I agree with Lizzy Dan. It is not fair for William at this stage to keep Kate hanging on. She deserves a life too, & if there is no future then he should let her go & find someone else…
By jackie Mccoy on July 28th, 2008 at 12:46 am
Dan,
I agree with you about the seriousness of marriage. It needs to be between two people who love each other and will support each other in good times and bad. I can only glimpse (if anyone can outside the royal family) that a royal marriage would have many more expectations. I certainly could not live that life. In my post, I was coming from the point of view that William and Kate have that kind of love. I see them as soul mates. However, I was hoping that William would use this time away from Kate to decide if he had that kind of love for Kate. ( if the decision had not already been made) When we are away from a situation we can sometimes see things more clearly. I don’t want either of them to go into a loveless marriage. I was not even thinking about the pomp and circumstance of a royal wedding. Here again, I see them as two people who love each other.
In looking from the outside, he seems to be saying that he wants to be with her. I say that because of her being with him during the important events in his life. (Wings, Garter, etc.)
As for Kate, I disagree with all of the negative press she is getting. I do believe that she is working with her parents and brother. I was more defending her from remarks made by people who do not know her situation. I don’t either.
I am the last person on earth to tell anyone what to do about marriage. All I was truly saying is if the wedding was to happen then a way could be found for it to proceed. I am a hopeless romantic who wants William and Kate to be happy.
I am sorry that I did not show that I realized the seriousness of the situation. I hope that neither one listens to me.
By kat on July 28th, 2008 at 1:10 am
Dan I have to disagree on one point with you Charles and Diana were together really less than a year before their engagement was announced. That said I really don’t think they had time to really get to know each other and Diana being so young time was on Charles side. If you look at Sophie and Edward they were together for about the same as where Kate and William stand now when they got engaged and married but Sophie was 35 and they have had many problems and heartaches having children.
I think if William really wants to marry Kate he will do it now or in the very near future. As for using this King-in -training excuse to further put off a wedding well that is rubbish he has plenty of years to train and it would be easier if he had her has his wife and support and learn their prospective roles together.
By Trudie on July 28th, 2008 at 5:08 am
I completely agree with Trudie.
By Amity on July 28th, 2008 at 5:26 am
I think that His Royal Highness getting his military training and duties as a royal out of the way will only allow him more time to focus on marital duties later on. He won’t be doing so much at one time as he is now. He will, undoubtedly, have a long time to get all of the training under his belt when his father becomes King though. And they should enjoy being young.
One of the positive things to come out of this would be for Prince William to get the gist of what his life will be, aside from observing what his grandparents and father do, but it will allow Miss Middleton to see what is in store for her as well. She will learn that being a royal is not all fun and games but work. And if she can’t handle it, she has time to depart and make a life for herself instead of being stuck in an unhappy marriage.
She should have some sort of career though. Nothing too flashy, but still, something to occupy her time and to show the people that she can work.
I would like to see her pick up a charity or two.
By Meg on July 28th, 2008 at 10:13 am
You are forgetting that they are potentially a future King and Queen. They need to produce an heir and a spare and that’s easiest when they are youngest. Getting into middle-aged fertility problems like Sophie and Edward is clearly not an option if it can be avoided.
I believe they have known the date for some time and it will emerge in due course. Only a tight inner group will be in on it. We can make educated guesses based on peripheral activities. I would love to get a copy of the bookings for Westminster Abbey for 2009. A pencil line around a whole week next summer would be very, very interesting.
I believe William, and possibly Kate, would prefer St George’s, but this is going to have massive world coverage. Only the Abbey will do in the end.
Again … let us wait and see.
By John on July 28th, 2008 at 10:32 am
John I think it will be St Pauls this wedding will be as big as his parents were. I think this for William would not be as sad a venue as the Abbey where his mother’s funeral was held. In the end where does the venue matter as long as they are happy.
By Trudie on July 28th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
The argument I like best is the Royal-Couple-in-training one.
To wit:
A) I don’t think William should go through it alone. Having a girlfriend on the side will only be a distraction.
B) This sounds precisely like the sort of preparation that neither Diana nor Sarah Ferguson were allowed, effectively dooming their marriages from the start.
C) Both William AND his bride should benefit from the two established Royal couples that can help them most: The Queen and the Duke, Charles and Camilla. The chance to learn the ropes of being an effective Prince and Princess of Wales and then King and Queen from the two incumbent couples is an opportunity that shouldn’t be wasted.
D) If this training involves government work as well as Commonwealth relations, they will both need it. The wife of the King must be able to keep up, or she will inevitably get shut out—if not by the King himself, then certainly by his court.
And finally,
E) I want to see horses, carriages, the cathedral (or the Abbey), the trumpets, the pageantry, and most of all, the DRESS!
By Dan on July 28th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
Trudie,
Right you are. I think William would want to marry Kate sooner rather than later precisely so she can support him in his new role. They won’t have to worry about royal protocol preventing her from attending certain functions.
John,
Do you think the couple will live together once Prince William returns Friday?
By lizzy on July 28th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
I think you are right Trudie and it will be St Pauls, for all that Charles and Diana’s marriage ended, that day was wonderful and those connotations remain.
If engaged couples ruled out every venue because a previous marraige ceremony had ended in divorce I wonder where they would find a place to make their vows.
I agree with Lizzy, if William and Kate don’t know yet that they want to commit for life then it is all equal.
By Eliza on July 28th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
The problem with St Paul’s is that it’s a long way from the Palace. When security advised Charles against it for his wedding because they didn’t have enough soldiers to man the route, he told them to stand them further apart.
Now we have Islamic terrorism to contend with, I think that argument will be impossible to deny.
Of course, it may also be used in favour of a Windsor wedding, but once they begin to assess the number of overseas broadcast units and the crowds determined to come, only London will do.
The couple on the balcony at Buckingham Palace is the iconic shot of big Royal occasions. I’m sure the Abbey will prevail in the end.
I may be wrong, of course.
By John on July 28th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
I don’t think they will move in together once he is back on Friday or whatever day he is back. He will have a couple of weeks off, then it’s back to the barracks in Windsor. At least that is how I have understood it. So he’ll have the weekends off and will probably stay at CH or Kate’s place in Chelsea. This is only for the rest of this year though, so where he live after that I have not read anything about. We’ll know in a while I suppose.
By dagga on July 28th, 2008 at 2:51 pm
I think you are right, John, as you almost invariably are. For junior Royals, St. George’s is an ideal venue for a wedding. For the second in line to the throne, it must be the Abbey, because Britain expects and tradition demands all the pomp and circumstance, splendor and sparkle that only a Royal Wedding of a man who will be king can provide. The entire world will be glued to their TV sets on the day of this wedding, and to manage the media, the crowds and the huge numbers of foreign dignitaries, Heads of State and other notables who must be invited to this wedding, it must be the Abbey. As you noted, John, security will be a huge factor in these post 9/11 days, and may well be the determining factor where the wedding venue is concerned. I adore Windsor and think a wedding there would be lovely, but a Royal wedding of this magnitude has always meant ecstatic crowds guraded by British soldiers lining the street, the Royal family riding to the Abbey from Buckingham Palace under specially designed wedding arches, military units mounted on splendid horses, officers in glittering dress uniforms with plumed helmets, and all the magnificent pageantry that only Great Britain can produce. To change that now to an understated event would, I think, be a tremendous disappointment for millions of people in the UK and across the globe. There is something so mystical and ethereal about services in the Abbey, although certainly Saint Paul’s is also an excellent venue.
By Gigi on July 28th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
I agree that there is no understating this event and that it ought to be the Abbey. I have always understood that the narrow streets around St. Paul’s are not suitable to the throngs of people, parades of carriages, phalanxes of media and what-not. Do-able, of course, as was proved for Charles and Diana, but not suitable. The procession between the Abbey and Buckingham Palace is grand for a reason.
By Dan on July 28th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
The only reason I have leaned towards St. George’s is because of William’s supposed preference for that venue. He’s pretty stubborn & seems like he wouldn’t relent on the location. Wherever it’s held I will definitely watch all the coverage. I can’t wait!
By lizzy on July 28th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
I’ve contacted the Dean of Westminster Abbey asking for a copy of the booking log for 2009, with particular reference to a Royal Wedding.
I’m probably being terribly impertinent and would be astonished if they gave me a date. But, nothing ventured, nothing gained.
By John on July 28th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
True, Gigi, Westminster Abbey was built in the reign of Edward the Confessor, before the Norman invasion of 1066, so has a resonance with our Anglo-Saxon past.
St Paul’s was built by Christopher Wren after the Great Fire of London in 1666, and is more Protestant in feel, with less mysticism in its bones.
By John on July 28th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
If we have learned anything about the Royal family over the years it’s that DUTY takes precedence over everything. If Westminster Abbey is deemed the appropriate venue for Prince William’s wedding, then that’s where it will be. Besides, what better way to supplant the feelings of sadness associted with Westminster Abbey, evoked by the funeral of Diana, Princess or Wales, than with the joy and happiness of the wedding of Diana’s beloved Prince William, or Prince Harry.
John, while you are at it, contact some of England’s best bridal designers and see if they have been commissioned to make a fantastic dress for some date in July, 2009.
By Arthur on July 28th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Better yet, let’s all contact the Abbey in hopes of booking it for a wedding next summer, and see which of us gets our desired date declined!
(It would be refreshing if such ways of subterfuge still worked in today’s world.)
By Dan on July 28th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
Dan, I contacted The Ritz in March to discover if the Queen’s Diamond Wedding party was still on. They have a rigid policy of non-disclosure of clients’ plans and bookings.
In some case, it’s necessary to have a mole on the inside to get personal information. I’ve never really been the James Bond type.
By John on July 28th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Arthur, I don’t know any bridal designers so wouldn’t know where to start. You can try if you like.
By John on July 28th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
Can anyone book Westminister Abbey for a wedding? I thought the Abbey was a Royal Peculiar and subject to the Queen’s jurisdiction.
By Arthur on July 28th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
Quite right, Arthur. I imagine you would have to have an official status to get a wedding there. A footballer and his WAG wife-to-be wouldn’t stand a chance — thank God!
By John on July 28th, 2008 at 4:42 pm
Yes, John and Arthur, I was aghast at the impertinence of some “celebrities” who rashly tried to book Westminister Abbey for their weddings in recent years. Talk about a disconnect and delusions of grandeur, garnished with a dollop of hutzpah~! I am grateful that the UK still has rules governing these things and boundaries that cannot be trespassed upon. Regarding the bridal gown, I doubt that sending discreet inquiries to the haute fashion designers will be fruitful. For one thing, a Royal bridal gown is guarded as if it were the Crown Jewels, and a designer who let slip such a Royal Commission would soon find herself or himself a designer to the Royals no longer. Remember what happened to the Samuels when they talked a bit too much in the years after the wedding and Princess Diana took umbrage? Quelle indiscrétion! Unless someone has a very close relative working in the inner sanctum of au couture, I doubt that we will be able to discover a clue to the wedding date in that manner. My hopes are pinned on John’s clever request to the Dean of Westminister Abbey. Let us all keep our fingers crossed!
The Duke of Marmalade, of course, must keep his hooves crossed, but whatever is fair. 
By Gigi on July 28th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Anybody find it strange Pippa was at the Cartier Polo but Kate wasn’t? Not just Pippa but Holly Branson, James Murray, & Guy Pelly. I hope Kate doesn’t feel the need to hide until William gets back.
By Lizzy on July 28th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
Interesting point, Lizzy. Actually, I found it curious that Charles was there without Camilla. She is a horse enthusiast and it was my impression that Charles prefers to attend these outings together with Camilla, rather than separately. I also was puzzled by the strange and rather declasse group of ‘celebrities’ invited to the Cartier polo event. Not at all top drawer! Worse than that was the improper attire they chose–egad! I realize it was a very hot summer day, but if Charles can appear perfectly groomed and dressed in summer whites, then so can they be properly turned out.
By Gigi on July 28th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Random thought but it might be possible that Kate has departed for whatever destination they are due to go to on holiday? Does he have to come back to England from Barbados or is it possible that he could take off straight away?
Other than that she has been at a lot of high profile events already this summer (tennis, Mandela concert, Lady Rose Windsor wedding) maybe she just decided to sit this one out?
By Jackie Mccoy on July 28th, 2008 at 6:22 pm
John,
I wasn’t a member of the board last year when William & Kate split up so I didn’t get to read your analysis. If you don’t mind repeating yourself I’d love to get your take on the break up and the very quick reconciliation that followed. Oh, anyone else who wants to chime in that would be great too.
By Lizzy on July 28th, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Is there a link to the Pippa pictures?
By dally on July 28th, 2008 at 9:06 pm
Dally is the link to some pictures at rex features of Pippa and co…
http://tinyurl.com/5dsl25
By Jackie Mccoy on July 28th, 2008 at 9:20 pm
Lizzy, click on the monthly archives in the sidebar and look at April and May 2007.
By John on July 28th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
we’re all certain that william and kate will marry – obviously the question is when…so we can all make our plans for gigi’s big do
i doubt that william is keeping kate “hanging on” and can imagine they have it all worked out between them just havent let the rest of us know… cant recall who posted before that marriage is a serious business and they dont want to make the same mistakes that were made before them…they’re young and that have plenty of time…in the meantime i think we should all start shopping for proper attire for the event 
By coni on July 28th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
I have a bit of a stupid question… I’m an American, so I’m not intimately familiar with the English monarchy, but…
What on earth is William “training” for? Public appearances and tabloid fodder? I don’t really understand what it is that he is training FOR.
By LauraAnn on July 28th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
I think we should, too, and I also believe that John should continue to compose his toast for the Royal Anecdotes Gala Royal Wedding Tea. Arthur, get your arms ready, because I shall rely upon you to pour the champagne—a LOT of champagne!
By Gigi on July 28th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
Gigi, no matter how improperly dressed some of the celebrities were at the Cartier Polo Match, they were definitely upstaged by the three streakers who stripped down to their birthday suits! It’s a good thing Her Majesty was in Scotland and not watching the polo match, as she usually does, from the Royal box.
Don’t worry about the champagne. I’m going to begin pouring a glass or two now, so my arm muscles will be well developed by next year.
Also, as a minor point of clarification, I believe you meant to refer to David and Elizabeth Emanuel as the designers of Diana’s wedding dress.
By Arthur on July 28th, 2008 at 11:45 pm
I wonder these people, saying that the couple is “too young” to get married. Are they serious? I was 20 years old/young when I got married, and my spouse was 22. We both are academically educated and relatively succesful people. We’ve been married for 16 years now.
People tend to get blind when it comes to age. Yes, it is true that more and more people want to wait till their 30s to get married, but please note this: it does not mean that these marriages would last! Yes, some people live together for years before they tie the knot – yet they do divorce. There .. is.. no.. guarantee. Plain and simple. More important than the couples age is their values.
Sure, it is their personal and private decision when to marry. But I wonder if all this is fair considering Kate Middleton? Here she is, she is attending royal weddings etc. “representing” William – more or less. She has no official status, she is not even his fiancé. Yet it is obvious that he does not want to lose her. They have a long history together.
And all the time people are talking and gossiping, about her not having a proper job (I guess people would like to see her as CEO in some bank or something, nothing else will do) and being “Waity-Katie”, like she should feel ashamed for valuing her loved one more than her career. People seem to blame her for 1) being too wealthy so that she CAN be Waity-Katie and 2) being too middle class since her parents are NOT billionaires and dukes and duchesses. Well I do not know about you people, but I have this funny feeling that she is in no-win situation. She just cannot get it right, can she.
I feel sorry for the girl.
By Peg on July 29th, 2008 at 12:02 am
I think the best designer for a wedding dress for Kate would be Catherine Walker. Catherine designed many memorable dresses for Diana. I also think she above all would know exactly how the dress would fit into the coach and If I am not mistaken she also designed the Wedding dress for Lady Helen Taylor.
By Trudie on July 29th, 2008 at 12:19 am
Jackie, according to the DM Kate flew out of Britain with her destination being Mustique. William will join her there on Friday. CH stressed in that same article that he would fly there paid by himself.
By kat on July 29th, 2008 at 12:25 am
Thanks Kat
That is great news!!!
By jackie Mccoy on July 29th, 2008 at 1:13 am
http://tinyurl.com/646vut
And the Daily Mail:
http://tinyurl.com/5vpne8 DM
Are claiming that Kate has jetted off to greet Prince William in Mustique on Friday. I admit I take these articles with a grain of salt; I’m just not totally convinced of their accuracy, not to mention the fact that supposedly William and Kate were just in Mustique two months ago so why would they go again?
But hopefully there is a grain of truth in there somewhere also. I’d certainly like for it to be true; the idea that the first thing William wants to do after serving five weeks aboard a RN ship is relax alone somewhere with Kate speaks well for their relationship.
By mapleleaf on July 29th, 2008 at 1:28 am
I just posted a comment but it’s awaiting moderation. Possibly because I included links? I provided links to the two articles from The Sun and the Daily Mail that state Kate has jetted off to join Prince William. Hopefully my comment will be released from moderation soon.
By mapleleaf on July 29th, 2008 at 1:30 am
Little surprised about Mustique. I thought maybe they would go back to Ibiza. I don’t want the paparazzi to hound them on vacation, but I can’t wait until they get back to the UK so we can get some new photos.
By lizzy on July 29th, 2008 at 1:33 am
Ibiza is full of paparazzi, Mustique is very private, no pictures the last time they went there, not even an airport sighting.
By Me on July 29th, 2008 at 2:08 am
Thank you, Arthur, for your willingness to be ready to pour copious amounts of champagne!
Also, thank you for the correction regarding the name of the couple who designed Princess Diana’s wedding gown. You are quite right, it was the Emanuels! I, too, was grateful that the Queen was not at the Cartier Polo event when the streakers went racing through. I am sure that Charles was grateful that the Queen was not there, also!
Thanks, Kat for the news that Kate is off to meet Prince William for a romantic holiday! Excellent!
By Gigi on July 29th, 2008 at 2:14 am
Mapleleaf, two links will put a comment into moderation since spam comments have lots! It’s now released from captivity.
By John on July 29th, 2008 at 8:27 am
LauraAnn, the British Monarch is Head of State — like your President, but without the day-to-day political side. We have a Prime Minister for all that.
As Head of State they are responsible for ceremonial occasions, opening Parliament etc., and have a constitution role overseeing the fairness and fair-dealing of the political process. It’s a difficult role, played effortlessly by the Queen, who has been at it for 56 years without a break.
She is also Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, although the Secretary of State for Defence looks after operational matters on her behalf and answers to Parliament.
There are many other strands, too numerous to cover here. William will have to learn about every one of them. He’s just spent three years in the the three Armed Services to prepare him for that role.
So your remark about “public appearances and tabloid fodder” is way off beam.
By John on July 29th, 2008 at 8:44 am
Peg, I’ve been saying the same for more than a year. I believe Kate’s position needs to be solidified so that she can’t be criticized like she is. Those who keep going on about her getting a job, have no understanding of British Royalty, its demands and its dangers.
Royals are not “celebrities”, like footballers’ wives, they do a serious job at the top of our constitutional arrangements.
By John on July 29th, 2008 at 8:48 am
I so agree with John’s last post!!
I am unsure though how much bad press and criticizme Kate really gets. Yes, I know about DM and all the different internet sites that just copy from there. But are all the British papers, magazines and TV channels as negative? Does the average British man or women know about all this Kate bashing or isit, as I tend to think, just an royal forums/internet thing.
Anyway I have a feeling that the bad press Kate does get is nothing in the minds of the royal family and their aides. They have known so unbelievably much worse. As long Kate doesn’t show any reaction, they are very happy with her, I’m sure.
BTW This last holiday story is another blow in the face of Katie Nicholl who just a couple of days ago was telling us that Kate was spending all this spare time of hers looking through holiday catalouges to find a suitable holiday. I suppose that holiday was planned weeks and months in advance. As they are. Always. As Katie Nicholls knows. I think by now everybody must find it terribly hard to believe KN’s stories.
By dagga on July 29th, 2008 at 9:20 am
Dagga, sorting out the truth from the froth in Royal reporting is very difficult, especially if you have a deadline to meet and your editor wants a Royal scoop written to order. I’m sure Katie Nicholl does her best. Here at RA, if there’s no story, I won’t publish anything — our contributors always find something to chat about.
As for Kate, it seems to be coming to a head now. There’s a one week window in August for an announcement. Here we go again …
By John on July 29th, 2008 at 9:29 am
It’s sweet how you defend Katie Nicholl
but I do honestly think she has lost some credibility.
What about this theory:
After their holiday in the sun, Kate and William will spend a week in the rain in Scotland, at Balmoral. There they will discuss their future with The Queen and Prince Charles and the date for an engagement annoncement will be set for later in the year or early next year.
Or the annoncement can come in August as you say. Oh, if we only knew
BTW I apologise for my bad English and all my spelling errors in past and future posts! It is sometimes hard to express opinions and feelings in a foreign language as well as you would like to. And my typing doesn’t help either
By dagga on July 29th, 2008 at 11:13 am
Dagga, if they spend their one free week at Balmoral, and that certainly seems likely, they will find it hard to avoid talking about the engagement in conversations with their hosts. It will be the topic uppermost on all their minds.
Personally, I think it would be amazing if it’s not done and dusted by now, although things change and sometimes you need to alter plans, as the Queen did with the rebooked Ritz party.
It’s just possible, of course, that an announcement could be made in Balmoral. It would suit William because it’s out of the way and very private. He could control the event to suit his own tastes.
Remember Diana’s photo-op and “press conference” in a field at Balmoral just after her engagement? That could suit William and Kate very well.
You heard it here first.
By John on July 29th, 2008 at 11:24 am
I think the engagement being announced at Balmoral would be ideally apropos! It is a very romantic setting and a beautiful estate, and mosts of the Royal Family would be gathered there for the August holiday. The only drawback is that the Queen greatly dislikes anything that interrupts her privacy at Balmoral, and an announcement of this long-awaited engagement is sure to send hordes of media racing to Balmoral with their long range lenses, cameras and anything else intrusive they can muster. Might the Queen disallow the announcement at that time and place as a result?
By Gigi on July 29th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Gigi, you may be right. I’m only taking a wild guess here.
However, it would give William control of the occasion and I’m sure the Queen would agree if he asked her nicely.
She did agree to the post-engagement event for Charles and Diana, and it would only take a day or two to move the media in and then move them out after a few interviews in the open air.
By John on July 29th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
John, I always hesitate before I question an expert on Royal trivia like you and Gigi, but I believe Diana’s photo op and “press conference,” in the field at Balmoral, was after Charles and Diana returned from their honeymoon. Their engagement was announced in February, the wedding was held at the end of July and Charles and Diana joined the Royal family at Balmoral after their honeymoon cruise. I believe that’s when the meeting with the press occurred. I remember Diana being asked if she made breakfast for herself and Prince Charles and Diana replied “I never eat breakfast.” It was a long time ago and I was a mere youngster at the time, so I could be wrong. However, that is the only photo op/press conference I remember at Balmoral. Nevertheless, your point is well taken. William and Kate posing together, in an idyllic field at Balmoral, would be a great place to announce their engagement.
By Arthur on July 29th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
Arthur, memories fade over time — or perhaps concertina is a better word. Unlike some, I don’t spend most of my time on Google.
You may well be right but, as you say, the point was to give an example of a media event at Balmoral involving a senior Royal Family member.
By John on July 29th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
Good point, John, I am sure you are right. The Queen is a loving and an indulgent grandmother and I am sure that if Prince William wishes to announce the engagement from Balmoral, she will agree. Very exciting to think that within a few weeks, the great event for which we have all been hoping may come to pass!!
By Gigi on July 29th, 2008 at 6:26 pm
Arthur, I believe your memory serves you well! I recall that the first interview with the newly engaged Diana and Charles was at Buckingham Palace, just outside, with Diana in a sapphire blue ensemble. The Balmoral interview was while they were on their honeymoon, with Diana wearing a two piece plaid or check ensemble, and she did indeed say that she never ate breakfast when asked by the press what she cooked for Charles’ breakfast.
By Gigi on July 29th, 2008 at 6:31 pm