Prince William in RAF until 2013?
Regular readers will remember that following the decision to outsource the RAF’s Search and Rescue service to a French-Canadian organization, Royal Anecdotes put in an information request to the Ministry of Defence to clarify Prince William’s position as a dedicated Sea King pilot in the service.
I have now received a reply from Headquarters Air Command, Royal Air Force in Buckinghamshire regarding the “phasing out of the Sea King operations”. The reply is as follows:
“As announced by the MOD in February 2010, Soteria Consortium has been chosen as the preferred bidder to provide the Search and Rescue Helicopter service for the UK. The contract is expected to be finalised in late 2010, at which point a detailed timetable of change will be decided. Presently, the service is anticipated to begin with a phased introduction in 2012 and will progressively take over site by site. The Sea King is expected to be out of service by 2016.
“Prince William hopes to qualify as an RAF Search and Rescue pilot in summer 2010. Once qualified, the Prince will become a full-time RAF Search and Rescue pilot. The normal tour length for a Search and Rescue pilot is 30-36 months, which would take Prince William to late 2012 or 2013.
“It would be inappropriate to speculate on the future of Prince William’s career until the contract replacing the MOD Search and Rescue Helicopter service has been finalised.”
So there we have it. William could serve into 2013, although it does seem unlikely given the uncertainty over the service. The last paragraph highlights that point.
When this story first broke earlier this year, the Conservative Defence Spokesman, Liam Fox, complained that this decision should have been taken after a General Election, probably due on May 6. That suggests he might have reservations over the outsourcing, or the proposed foreign contractor. I will write to Dr Fox asking for details of Conservative policy on this matter.
It now looks as if William’s normal career flow within SAR won’t be altered because of the current arrangements, especially if, as expected, the Conservatives win the election. However, the uncertainty involved may give him an opportunity to bail out before his time is up.
Very interesting. Thanks for all the digging on this, John!
By Leslie on March 10th, 2010 at 1:15 pm
I do hope he gets to do the the work he desires for a little time, if any.
Thanks for the update and the excellent research, John!
By Meg on March 10th, 2010 at 1:57 pm
Thank you for going straight to the source and posting their reply, John. Very well done. Very interesting.
How long Prince William stays in may depend on where he is assigned, and when the new company takes over that site. If the contract is finalized by the time Prince William completes his SAR training, it will be interesting to see whether he’s assigned to one of the early transition sites, or one of the later transition sites.
I would guess the Royal Family might ask for either. They may feel they need Prince William to be more active as a working Royal. Or they may feel it would be better for him to not be seen as a “quitter” and ask for a site that would allow him to complete his full tour.
Sounds like another “wait and see” situation.
By Evelyn on March 10th, 2010 at 2:10 pm
Evelyn, our local SAR site that covers N. Devon and N. Cornwall is already subject to restrictions and has been replaced by another site across the Bristol Channel. So this work has already started.
Liam Fox’s thoughts will be interesting.
By John on March 10th, 2010 at 2:15 pm
Thank you for going to such pains to get that clarified, John. I shall be most interested in what you learn from Mr. Fox. I am still convinced that there is a well-constructed timetable for Prince William which structures his career and the future course of his personal life. Unfortunately, no one seems to know the details of the timetable but the Inner Circle (I am assuming those members to be Prince William, Kate Middleton, the Queen, Prince Philip, Charles and Prince Harry, and a necessary courtier or perhaps more.) I must say that this timetable has been kept padlocked with astonishing success, a thing that is very difficult to do in the Royal residences, where the walls almost literally have ears. I must observe that most of the news being published about the Royal Family focuses on the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh, and rightfully so. However I am also seeing almost daily photos, features, articles and tidbits highlighting Charles and Camilla, far more than ever before. This is happening at the same time when there is virtually no news regarding Prince William and Kate Middleton. I do not believe this is a coincidence. I believe that Charles perceived his sons rising as media stars and standing in the center ring, a place Charles reserves for himself. Perhaps Charles and his zealous band of men are the puppet masters, managing the media and polishing and promoting the public profiles of Charles’ and Camilla. I don’t believe that this scheme will make them more palatable but neither do I believe that Charles is capable of perceiving that the blot on his copybook is indelible.
By Gigi on March 10th, 2010 at 3:58 pm
Great reporting, John! (As always
!)
By Julie on March 10th, 2010 at 6:37 pm
I see that Kate has won her apology and monetary damages from Rex Features for those Christmas tennis court pictures. Can we expect the money (perhaps $10K) to be donated to charity?
By Dan on March 11th, 2010 at 5:01 pm
Her solicitors already indicated it would be — see the media section in the Telegraph (or maybe the Guardian? I forget which one). No specific charity was mentioned, however.
By sojourner on March 11th, 2010 at 10:36 pm
My guess is that there will not be much–if any–money left after Kate pays the legal fees, unless the monetary damages specifically included court costs and solicitors/barristers fees. Ten thousand dollars is a small monetary reward when you consider what legal representation costs per hour.
By Gigi on March 11th, 2010 at 11:29 pm
Good pt Gigi, though I do believe that was part of the deal… goodness knows how the newspapers came up with the monetary figure anyway.
What I really find hilarious are the photographers excuses. He didn’t follow her, he says, but showed up on a tip: and what is the difference between those to statements, pray tell? Did he mean to say that he was not stalking her? Should she then be grateful for such small mercies?
By sojourner on March 12th, 2010 at 12:12 am
Clearly the photographer was skating on very thin ice if that was his defense, sojourner. This is the kind of arrogance that ill-behooves civilized society. Today, so many people insist on making a living by constant and extraordinary infringement on the private lives of well-known persons. To make matters worse (if such a thing is possible) these same intruders behave as if they feel entitled to commit this outrageous form of harassment. They are entirely out of hand. I am very pleased that Kate’s case prevailed in court.
By Gigi on March 12th, 2010 at 1:03 am
Hey Gigi? I need to ask your advice on something, not related to the Windsors. Would you mind emailing me, please? It’s nothing weird, I promise, I just wanted your take on something. If you’re not comfortable, I understand entirely. My email is monkeyfish at gmail dot com. Thanks! ~Leslie
By Leslie on March 12th, 2010 at 4:23 pm
Just read these at another site… Ten (purported) gaffe’s by Prince Phillip. I am left dazed and confused. Very clever and fast thinker, but several hundred censor (let alone sensitivity) chips missing.
To paraphrase my neighbor “Whatz up wit dat?”
http://tinyurl.com/yktsveo
By sojourner on March 13th, 2010 at 12:19 am
The Telegraph is reporting that Harry’s charity, WellChild, was swindled by a Conservative MP and his wife:
http://tinyurl.com/y979tk8
I feel sorry for Harry as this casts a poor light on his ability to attract reputable overseers for his charity, although I suppose it was really set up by CH. John, what do you know about this?
By NCKat on March 13th, 2010 at 4:05 am
NCKat, he was a former MP, kicked out in 1997, but it was a rotten thing to do. Now it seems Sentebale has a fund raiser who keeps flying to Barbados at the charity’s expense. Many charities are being ripped off by fund raisers it seems.
By John on March 13th, 2010 at 11:08 am
The Telegraph is reporting that the royal florist is dreaming about what flowers might work best for Prince William & Kate’s wedding.
I’m sure he hasn’t been officially asked to begin planning, though. 
By Evelyn on March 13th, 2010 at 11:58 pm
Not sure he’d be used now after making such public pronouncements!
By NCKat on March 14th, 2010 at 12:19 am
Not used by Royals, quite possibly. But how about many others who read the piece, and now know of his existence? Just another coattail rider.
By sojourner on March 14th, 2010 at 2:05 am
The Daily Star is reporting that Prince Harry is surprising many by finishing in the top 10% of his helicopter training class. It says that whether flying a Lynx or an Apache helicopter, Prince Harry could return to Afghanistan before the end of this year. I haven’t seen those details in more reputable media, though.
By Evelyn on March 14th, 2010 at 2:10 am
Another holiday…
News of The World reports: “Prince William’s girlfriend will enjoy a plush £8,000 ski break in the Alps with her mum Carole and dad Mike.” PW will not be joining them.
I wonder if the paps will dare shoot?
By Cristina on March 14th, 2010 at 11:37 pm
Considering that NOTW isn’t the most reliable news site, there might not be anything for them to photograph. Even if it’s true, PW is still on active duty so no time for him to go on holiday now.
By NCKat on March 14th, 2010 at 11:47 pm
Please Note: From time to time one of our readers/contributors wishes to contact another and places the request in a comment. The internet being what it is, this is often unwelcome.
Consequently, we have a rule that personal contacts are not encouraged unless the nature of the request is made through the moderator and conveyed privately to the recipient.
Our email address is: john(at)syntagmamedia(dot)com
By John on March 15th, 2010 at 12:53 pm
Great reporting job, John!!
By Alicia on March 15th, 2010 at 8:51 pm
Cristina and NCKat,
NOTW is wrong again — because PW went on the trip!
http://www.catscompilation.blogspot.com/
Pictures from a woman sitting next to them in Courvachel.
By sojourner on March 15th, 2010 at 10:12 pm
Well done Sojourner, it is always good the hear from “real” people and so, from the comments posted, one must assume that they are in love after all. Why, oh why does he keep her waiting like this????
Thanks for the link Sojourner.
By Cristina on March 16th, 2010 at 1:27 am
Thanks, Cristina, but “the internets”
are already abuzz with this story. I find her post cute, sweet and harmless. Much more insidious seems to be some twits by “hosts” (I assume means butler/châtelaine) of a Chalet where the Middleton’s are said to be staying for the week. Such information has got to be a breech of something! But perhaps I am misunderstanding (or the posts are untrue).
By sojourner on March 16th, 2010 at 1:44 am
Got babies on my mind… I meant to write “breach” of something
By sojourner on March 16th, 2010 at 1:47 am
Well, Twitter is certainly spreading the word. Looks like quite a few people have also been witnesses to the loving banter that was going on at the restaurant. There is also a comment about how much more slim Kate is than she appears in the press, she is described a being very tiny. That same person said that she was very pretty.
There is just nowhere to hide these days…
By Cristina on March 16th, 2010 at 1:51 am
I was wrong about the tweets — just random sightings by people. No squealing
By sojourner on March 16th, 2010 at 2:32 am
I wonder if this ski holiday was Carole Middleton’s Mothers’ Day gift. One good thing– Kate & Prince William won’t have to decide which family to spend that holiday with.
By Evelyn on March 16th, 2010 at 3:07 am
According to Greenslade Blog at The Guardian, the story about Kate’s dog eating her earrings was false:
http://tinyurl.com/y8dzjxg
I think the last sentence sums it up nicely, don’t you? CH should be rallying behind Kate and PW and it seems to be letting the rumor mill run away with wild and silly stories.
By NCKat on March 16th, 2010 at 11:39 am
I would like to offer a different interpretation to CH silence:
If they comment, the relationship — on whatever grounds — is official. If they do not, KM is a private citizen, and she can sue the pants off anyone who crosses the line.
By sojourner on March 17th, 2010 at 1:54 am
This is what I mean about cruelty on his side, it certainly does not look like the RF want to make this relationship official, possibly because the wedding is not to take place for some time…
Sojourner has a point therefore and I think he is cruel and she is stupid. Honestly, would it kill him to marry her if he is SOoo in-love as he depicts in this latest holiday?
Get a life/real job Kate!!
Apologies, I am frustrated!
By Cristina on March 17th, 2010 at 2:23 am
The call for Kate to “get a life/real job” strikes me as disconnected from her real life as she actually lives it. One would think we were talking about a fat, lazy couch potato living guilt-free on taxpayer money.
She’s young, intelligent, beautiful, rich, nearly Royal, and currently enjoying her fourth holiday in a year with her boyfriend, who happens to be the world’s most sought-after unmarried man.
That is Kate’s “real life.” She and William are living the fairy-tale life that nearly every person on this planet has dreamed of living. Doesn’t every little girl dream of being Princess to her Prince Charming one day? Well, guess what? For Kate is isn’t a dream. It is her “real life.” Get used to it.
The notion that she should spend some time slogging to a day job for the sake of appearing “just like the rest of us” is absurd, and entirely divorced from her reality.
This obsessive din about work and marriage as some kind of ball-and-chain that Kate must immediately shackle to her already fairy-tale existence marks a refusal on her critic’s part to accept that her current life is just peachy as it is, thank you very much. Her critics are saying that she must give it up and be a worker-bee just like the rest of us, if only for a while, so we can be content that she has “paid her dues.”
Why? Her critics need to finally accept that her life will never be like theirs, and their lives will never be like hers.
Eat cake, critics!
By Dan on March 17th, 2010 at 3:22 pm
And another thing…
Who among us still believes that W&K have not worked all this out between themselves?
Do we really believe that Kate hasn’t already nailed William to the wall on all the points of her life that we bewail?
They know precisely what they are doing, and they don’t care that we haven’t a clue. In fact, they PREFER that we remain in the dark, since, in their knowing eyes, none of it is any of our business.
To those who say they are jeopardizing our future affection for them, that’s twaddle. We will fall precisely into line behind them when we are called to do so.
Let’s face it: we’re suckers for fairy tales.
By Dan on March 17th, 2010 at 3:37 pm
Thanks, Dan– well said.
As I read the news about this latest holiday, it sounds like Prince William’s training had a week-long break come up unexpectedly. I’m glad Kate had the flexibility in her schedule to be able to do something with him. I’d much rather have him skiing with Kate than off with a group of guy-friends. Not that I have anything against guy-friends, but I know the media would look at that as a sign that PW wasn’t really committed to Kate, looking for an escape from the relationship, blah blah blah. Better that they’re seen together and happily in love.
By Evelyn on March 17th, 2010 at 3:53 pm
Excellent, Dan! Thank you very much for your well-reasoned, well-expressed post! That is exactly the situation as I view it and I am, frankly, quite pleased with Prince William and Kate’s handling of their situation. I also feel strongly that Prince William and Kate have their future plans in place, have constructed their timeline, and will share it with the world at a time of their–not our–choosing, which is perfectly proper. Kate Middleton doesn’t have to do a single blessed thing to prove to me that she is worthy to marry Prince William and become a member of the Royal Family. She has earned my respect by being a well-behaved, well-bred young lady and by her splendid behavior in trying circumstances during public outings. Further, any young lady whom Prince William chooses will have my support but I must admit that I believe that Kate will make the ideal consort for our Golden Prince. Prince William has chosen well and I am simply delighted! I would be grateful if the media will calm down and cease their hyper-ventilating. Let us all be patient and all will be well. Of course the delay is frustrating, but the upside is that it gives us more time to prepare for the Royal Anecdotes Gala Royal Engagement Tea! This is NOT the work of the moment, I assure you!
By Gigi on March 17th, 2010 at 4:23 pm
Dan,
Yep, right on. This couple has it as they both like it, unfathomable as it might be to many.
By sojourner on March 17th, 2010 at 11:34 pm
Well, I don’t want to get fat eating all that cake Dan! And critic I shall continue to be. Fairy-tale you say? Not acceptable to me if this is the woman who will be the future Queen. There are millions who suffer in poverty and far too many children who are exploited in slavery of all sorts. Stupidly there are also an increasing number of girls who think they can sit idle and wait for their rich guy to come and marry them, or for fame and fortune to find them, no talent required apparently.
This public couple has responsibilities to at least appear to be more sensitive to those who do not live in the fairy-tale you describe and those who can never afford to aspire to financial independence. And by saying that I am not expecting them to slave away at work and not have any holidays… There should be a balance. PW seems to manage it.
My understanding of modern royalty is that their function is to serve the people. I think criticism is well deserved and I suspect that your prediction of us all falling in line behind them when we are called to do so will not be so accurate. Have we fallen behind Charles or Camilla?
I’m younger than most of you (I think). My idea of a fairy-tale life is different from yours and I expect the generations after me will also have their own version. Walt Disney is tying to keep up with the times — just go see the Princess and the Frog – the RF and those who aspire to be royal should do likewise.
I don’t believe idol lives make for a fairy-tale existence and I am also disapproving of the benchmark they are setting. Going by the posts I have read in the media, this sentiment is widely shared and although I understand that a lot is derived from jealousy one must admit that there are those who are genuinely concerned by the example she is setting.
By Cristina on March 18th, 2010 at 12:58 am
For anyone living in Italy, GIOIA, an Italian weekly women’s magazine is preparing an article on the puzzle of the long-term relationship between Prince William and Kate Middleton.
The journalist, Ilaria Solari, will be in London next week researching the piece, so it won’t be the usual cut and paste job, which we are all very familiar with. You may though find Royal Anecdotes quoted.
By John on March 18th, 2010 at 11:49 am
Our lives are what we make of them. They are ours to live as we wish, and with whom we wish. Let us not forget that most of the so-called fairy tales also have a darker side. The Brothers Grimm come to mind in this instance. I do wish the happy couple well, if only for the fact that they have had to endure the limelight that the rest of us only read about in the papers. We can all speculate until we are blue in the face, but PW is PW. Yes, he is a public figure. Yes, he is held to a higher degree, especially where his love life is concerned. He has to realize this. But we also have to realize that somewhere inside that “Prince” there is also a 27-year-old young man who is just living life with the girl that he has chosen to love. Isn’t that what all of us want?
By Jacque on March 18th, 2010 at 11:54 am
The Telegraph says that Prince Harry “is reported” to have requested being assigned to fly Lynx helicopters in Afghanistan, rather than flying Apaches. The article says “an official announcement on his future is expected early next week.”
By Evelyn on March 18th, 2010 at 1:24 pm
Of Kate’s critics, I would ask: What sort of a job would satisfy you? Clearly it isn’t enough that she (reportedly) works for her family’s party supply business, although working for the family firm is typical of children of business owners (and by the way, is great practice for joining the ultimate family “firm,” the Royal Family.)
Again, I believe her critics are ignoring the facts, or are simply kvetching that her life is not hum drum and work-a-day, like most everyone else’s.
As for being responsible for feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, etc…. That’s a job for us all, not just the rich and well-connected people that we’d like to pass the job off to.
By Dan on March 18th, 2010 at 4:50 pm
This site has always been pro-Kate, although in recent years I’ve questioned the almost interminable delay in defining the couple’s future, if only by an extended engagement.
I agree that she is a free agent. The kind of girl William will know is just like that, living off a trust fund and doing little else. If Kate were to downsize as a “shop girl”, as once she did with Jigsaw, her life would not be worth living.
At present, she seems to be steering a middle path through the minefield she finds herself in.
If I can find fault with anyone it would be William. His apparent intransigence in making her position clear, apart from the occasional dinner and holiday with her family, whom he appears genuinely to like, is mysterious to me.
By John on March 18th, 2010 at 5:00 pm
While I probably appear strident in my defense of the status quo (i.e., “what’s the rush?”), I confess that I do have my limits, and I don’t disagree with John.
I think William can continue to take his time in the near term, but becoming another Prince Albert of Monaco is not an option. There’s a point where credible bachelorhood becomes evidence of true commitment aversion. No one wants a King who can’t commit.
By Dan on March 18th, 2010 at 7:25 pm
Actually, Cristina, you sound like a good old fashioned feminist to me!
By sojourner on March 18th, 2010 at 10:18 pm
I agree with John and Dan. At this point, in my view, there is no fault to be assessed against either Kate or Prince William. However, if Prince William continues to delay past the point where uneasy impatience becomes central nervous system damage born of heart palpitation-inducing frustration, then shall I also begin to raise one eyebrow regarding Prince William’s tendency to delay. As the man who will be King, in the fullness of time, his duties are many and varied. Important among those duties is to marry a young woman worthy to be Queen Consort and to sire an heir. These duties must be accomplished in a timely fashion and to delay beyond a prudent timeline, as we have seen, may result in painful consequences. Prince William has chosen wisely in his selection of a young lady. May his choice of timeline be equally wise, for all our sakes.
By Gigi on March 18th, 2010 at 11:44 pm
Daily Mail has PW repeatedly calling Monsieur Middleton “Dad” during a dinner… “in a jokey way”
But maybe we can use this as an excuse to start a progressive *tea* drinking game: bottoms up every time PW is about to propose?
By sojourner on March 19th, 2010 at 1:32 am
Oh, dear, we’ll all be under the table with Dan!!!
By Julie on March 19th, 2010 at 6:48 pm
*Hic*
The more the merrier!
By Dan on March 19th, 2010 at 8:01 pm
Fortunately, the tea table is large enough to accommodate an impressive number of the Royal Anecdotes Surveillance Team.
The rest of us breathlessly await your report!
By Gigi on March 19th, 2010 at 8:47 pm
I’ll put my glass of bubbly down long enough to pose a question:
Why is the hand-wringing over Prince Harry’s potential return to the front in Afghanistan being carried out in public? I can understand the media’s interests in such a story, but it seems to be stoked by the military and by Harry himself.
Can’t they keep such decision making to themselves? I half-expect them to parade him through Helmand on a sedan chair when he hits the ground, all the while tweeting “I’m back, come get me!”
By Dan on March 19th, 2010 at 9:24 pm
That has puzzled me, too, Dan. In time of war, troop movements and individual deployments were always safeguarded by the highest levels of security and kept secret from all but those at the highest command rank. I am floored that these matters regarding assigning Prince Harry to duty in a Forward Area are being banded about by the gutter press. I must believe that the information is either manufactured to spur sales or that there is a mole in the highest echelon of the British military. John, what is your own opinion?
By Gigi on March 19th, 2010 at 10:02 pm
Dan, I can’t see him going to Afghanistan again. He’s now talking about joining an injured servicemen’s trek to the North Pole.
His sudden switch to the Lynx rather than the Apache is strange, especially after the publicity about him doing so well on the Apache course. We’re not being told the complete story here.
By John on March 19th, 2010 at 10:05 pm
Re: PH (non?) deployment
From the British Army website
“The Army variant of Lynx Wildcat will perform a range of tasks on the battlefield including reconnaissance, command and control, transportation of troops and material, and the provision of force protection.”
This provides a much broader range of uses than the Apache, which seems all about fire power.
John,
can you see PH as Peace Envoy/Keeper somewhere in Africa?
By sojourner on March 19th, 2010 at 10:59 pm
Sojourner, I don’t believe we have that sort of role any more in Africa.
In Afghanistan, the Lynx could be a useful aircraft but it’s hardly a Chinook. Unless they have built a much larger version, which, given the uselessness of the MoD’s procurement department seems unlikely, I can’t see it doing what you say — maybe in 2020, with any luck.
It could be used for command and control, though, and, as Harry did that before, it’s possible. But something tells me he won’t be risked again on the front line.
By John on March 19th, 2010 at 11:09 pm
I was thinking of Sierra Leone, or the training facilities in Kenya… but perhaps you are right — the Lynx would be the wrong machine for the purpose
By sojourner on March 20th, 2010 at 12:10 am
I wish neither Prince Harry nor Prince William would fly helicopters. They are so dangerous and for the pilot, the margin for error and the chances of survival in case of a crash are very slim. Why does the Queen allow the Heir to the Throne and his only sibling to take these kinds of chances with their lives? The Ministry of Defense needs to recollect and give very careful consideration to the fact that if anything happens to either of the young princes while they are serving in Forward Areas, there will
be Hell to pay. I simply do not understand the logic nor the apparent necessity of playing Russian Roulette with the life of the Heir to the Throne. This is perfect madness!
By Gigi on March 20th, 2010 at 1:26 am
I think you might be right Sojourner, I do sound like a feminist! Hopefully not old fashioned…
Feminist, republican, what next?
How about a PP (professional photographer) for KM Dan? We have very flexible times for our shoots, she could block out times for her lover. The only problem would be holidays/outings at short notice.
Harry for king! Just viewed his speech on the North Pole challenge for disabled soldiers, what a guy!
By Cristina on March 21st, 2010 at 7:07 am
Haven’t we been led to believe that Kate is already working as a photographer for her family, photographing all that stuff for her family’s website?
Who’s to know, I suppose.
By Dan on March 21st, 2010 at 5:39 pm
Not enough volume or variety Dan. Not sure you even have to have any qualifications to shoot catalogue work. She loves photography, get out there and do it. She doesn’t even have to have many dealings with people if she so chose. There are so many options with photography…
By Cristina on March 22nd, 2010 at 1:54 am
Maybe Kate is doing photography, but no one knows all that she’s doing because she doesn’t want the paps following her everywhere. Perhaps she’s working on a book of photos… to be published when they announce their engagement, with all royalties going to charity.
We don’t know what she may be working on.
By Evelyn on March 22nd, 2010 at 2:01 am
The law in Britain that covers photography is now so strict it almost eliminates it outside of a studio. Recently, a BBC photographer was questioned by police after taking some shots of St Paul’s Cathedral against a sunset. He was questioned under anti-terrorist legislation just in case he was measuring it up for an attack.
Taking pictures of people in the street is also regarded as dangerous, especially other people’s children.
Apart from the latter, where common sense should prevail, the state’s attitude to the former has become totally paranoid.
Kate would do well to stick with studio work, or give up photography completely.
By John on March 22nd, 2010 at 12:48 pm
No matter what Kate does people criticize her because she is Prince William’s girlfriend.
By Mikado-watcher on March 22nd, 2010 at 12:49 pm
I happen to have extensive experience in the “catalogue work” Cristina speaks of. It most certainly requires “qualifications.”
Flip through a coffee-table book on ceramics, for example, or pick up a Sotheby’s or Christie’s auction catalogue. We make it look easy, but I assure you, studio photography is not for the simple-minded.
By Dan on March 22nd, 2010 at 1:52 pm
Well said, Mikado-watcher. There are a large number of very opinionated people out there who evidently have nothing better to do than to be hyper-critical about members of the Royal Family and others in the inner circle of the Royal Family. The “green-eyed monster” (jealousy) is prominent in many of these scathing remarks that are posted on various sites. This type of irrational criticism has been present in America for some years now and is among the least attractive part of the American character. I never thought that I would see this mean-spirited behavior erupt in Great Britain, of all places. It is too bad to behave in such a way. It is an example of rank incivility and as such is distinctly opposite to the English code of conduct. This type of thing really isn’t done.
By Gigi on March 22nd, 2010 at 1:55 pm
Yep, the consensus is that KM will lead her life and not the life on anyone else. As much as we would think to lead her life differently if we where in her place, the fact is, well… we aren’t. Lucky girl. Good for her. Might she live long and prosper.
By sojourner on March 22nd, 2010 at 2:21 pm
I do look forward to the publication of KM’s book of photos, perhaps she is doing some macro work – life of bugs around her parents property?
By Cristina on March 22nd, 2010 at 10:06 pm
Oh come on Cristina that just sounds snarky “life of bugs”. This isn’t the type of thing RA readers/commenters typically do. Are you just trying to stir the pot and get a rise out of people? hmmm
Of course catalogue and business website photography requires more than the average person’s skills. Are you kidding me? One would have to have appropriate equipment and skills with editing to do so. None of us know what she does or does not do at Party Pieces. KM is not a bad role model. I am 27 years old and enjoy admiring her shiny hair but that is about it. I don’t need to look to people in the news , WAGS, or royal GFs for role models, but people around me who are successful in the areas of my interests. Instead of sitting around wasting time criticizing these people, use that energy to get involved in positively influencing today’s youth (I’m a teacher so I get to do that daily).
By happydally on March 22nd, 2010 at 11:31 pm
This week’s edition of “HELLO!” will have an “exclusive” article on Prince William’s and Kate’s “romantic holiday” in the Alps. The cover photo shows them both on a snowmobile, smiling and looking directly into the camera.
Might PW&K have arranged for a media photoshoot in exchange for the paps leaving them alone on their holiday– like Prince Charles did when the princes were younger?
By Evelyn on March 23rd, 2010 at 1:08 am
The article in HELLO Magazine about Prince Harry planning to accompany handicapped soldiers on a trip to the Pole gave me a tremendous lift! I am so proud of his positive attitude and the compassion he shows for those whose needs are greatest. He certainly inherited the “common touch” from Princess Diana and I am delighted to see him winning golden opinions and following through. This bodes very well for the effectiveness and the relevance of the Monarchy in the future. I am assuming that the trip to the Pole will be less perilous than a deployment to Afghanistan, as the former location will not feature an implacable enemy seeking to destroy him.
By Gigi on March 23rd, 2010 at 4:51 pm
As his life unfolds, I hope Harry sticks with his military associations as his uncle Andrew did not. I don’t believe Andrew’s work for British business has burnished his image as well as remaining a member of the armed forces might have. If he were flying about in military aircraft rather than the first-class cabin of the world’s airlines, I doubt he would have been tagged with the “Airmiles Andy” taunt.
By Dan on March 23rd, 2010 at 5:00 pm
I believe that taunt was an invention of media hacks, was it not? The media always seems to have undue criticism of the Royal Family at the top of their agenda. I have no doubt that the Duke of York logs significant air miles, but so does Charles. Both Charles and the Duke of York are, in most instances, traveling on business for the Crown. If the Queen did not wish her sons to travel to the extent they do while doing the business of the Kingdom, I feel certain that she would make her wishes known and prevent them from doing so on taxpayer funds. The exceptions are when Charles and the Duke of York are flying to exotic locations for pleasure, or when Charles has rented immense yachts or extravagant airplanes to take himself, Camilla and a large staff on junkets for Charles to collect prizes. That does seem inappropriate. As for Prince Harry continuing his association with the military, I have no doubt that this will be so, but perhaps, like the Duke of York, he will serve in a less hands-on capacity, as Honorary Colonel of a regiment. This less-than-active military status becomes more necessary as princes are called upon to represent the Crown. The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh cannot be everywhere and they are in their eighties.
By Gigi on March 23rd, 2010 at 5:52 pm
I can’t help but feel that there is a bit of snobbery going on when it comes to Kate Middleton working for her parents’ mail order business. If Mr. and Mrs. Middleton owned and operated an Advertising Agency in central London, and Kate worked for them at the Ad Agency, she probably would be praised as a career woman on the go. Unfortunately, Party Pieces seems to be regarded as a less than honorable profession by the social set that would never do anything so gauche as to order merchandise from a catalogue. At Party Pieces, Kate doesn’t have to be looking over her shoulder, wondering if a coworker is spying on her for some trashy tabloid, and when she goes on vacation with her parents, Mr. and Mrs. Middleton are paying for it, not the taxpayers.
By Arthur on March 23rd, 2010 at 6:15 pm
Bravo, Arthur. Then again, were she working in central London, we would hear daily critique of her hair and wardrobe (“didn’t she wear those same shoes last month?”), and God forbid the hypothetical ad agency’s client list would be released to the media, as Kate would be blamed for every blemish on their collective record. And of course her parent’s agency would owe all of its success to their tawdry taking advantage of their Royal connections.
We’ve seen it all before. Diana tried to continue schoolteaching, the Countess of Wessex tried to continue in her own business, etc.
Kate’s better off where she is: private, protected, and as you say, at no taxpayer expense.
By Dan on March 23rd, 2010 at 7:03 pm
Reflecting on the HELLO! “exclusive” of PW&K in the Alps… *if* PW&K did indeed arrange a photo-shoot so the media would leave them alone, I think that is a sure indication that Prince William intends Kate to be his bride.
I hope some RAer will get a copy of that issue as soon as it’s available and report details!
By Evelyn on March 23rd, 2010 at 7:21 pm
Well said Arthur! Splendid remarks! That is exactly the situation, and Dan, your remarks are also right on the money, as they say here. I wonder at these negative persons who find every possible opportunity to criticize Kate for every single aspect of her life. I must wonder if these critical individuals are, indeed, gainfully employed, since they appear to have so much discretionary time in which to make their pejorative views clear on internet sites. Regarding the Middleton’s company, if working for the successful business owned by one’s family is no longer viewed as an honorable and worthy profession, I must wonder what is? Some aspect of modern life has gone horribly wrong, and I must believe it is the collective value system of society. Let us all recollect, for all our sakes, what is truly to be valued and what is not.
By Gigi on March 23rd, 2010 at 7:55 pm
If KMs parents are able to afford the lifestyle they lead, someone, somewhere, is working, and not just pretending — is all I have to say.
By sojourner on March 23rd, 2010 at 10:10 pm
Good points, Dan, Arthur, Sojourner!
I’ve often felt that a company that is so successful as to support whole families should not be so malinged, unless the product is unsavory
Which it is not.
By Julie on March 24th, 2010 at 2:19 pm
agree with above comments..since when is working for ones family business not an honorable profession…dont the royals work for the famly firm…my experience has been those who work for famiy business work hard and longer hours as more is expected of them…
gigi – looking forward to your next ‘spread”
cheers
By coni on March 25th, 2010 at 1:17 am
Lots of pictures of PW and KM everywhere! Our prince seems to have had a charming time. Are we in now for another dry season? Maybe we could parch our thirst with some libations…
By sojourner on March 25th, 2010 at 1:24 am
British Monarchy’s Twitter site is announcing that Charles has returned to the UK after spending a day in Afghanistan visiting the troops flighting there. Including the travel time, he was gone for two days, evidently. I am very pleased that he visited the troops in a dangerous forward area and even more pleased that he has returned safe and sound.
By Gigi on March 25th, 2010 at 4:35 pm
Did he fly to the front from Central Europe? A previous post on the PoW website says that he and Camilla visited a school in Prague on Mar 23 “before leaving for the UK.”
Perhaps she flew home alone while he went on?
By Dan on March 25th, 2010 at 4:50 pm
I don’t know, Dan. The announcement I first saw was “Breaking News” which gave no link to a story and no details. The British Monarchy site for Twitter just said he had returned from visiting the troops in Afghanistan. The Prague visit may have been a cover for Charles being in Afghanistan because if the details of his visit were known to the public prior to his safe return, he would have been much more of an enemy target.
By Gigi on March 25th, 2010 at 5:44 pm
MSNBC World News division is reporting that Charles was in Afghanistan today, Thursday. The UK is six hours behind the Central Time Zone in the USA, so I don’t know how long he stayed in Afghanistan, but he was there visiting the troops. Good show! It is always a morale booster for the troops when a member of the Royal Family visits them in dangerous areas and reassures them of their value to the Kingdom and the importance of their mission.
By Gigi on March 25th, 2010 at 5:50 pm
The Telegraph is reporting that Prince Harry has so impressed the military that they’re offering him the option to continue training on either Apache or Lynx helicopters. PH has been given a month to make his decision. He’ll make that decision in consultation with his military commanders and the Royal Family.
By Evelyn on March 27th, 2010 at 11:08 pm
Thank you for posting that, Evelyn! I am very pleased with this positive feedback about our Golden Prince Harry! I am so proud of him!
By Gigi on March 27th, 2010 at 11:37 pm
It is good news for Prince Harry, but I know it may not be good news for your heart, Gigi. If PH chooses the Apache, he is more likely to be sent to the front lines in Afghanistan, which will put him at considerable risk, though perhaps not much more than any soldier.
I wonder how Chelsy will handle all this.
By Evelyn on March 27th, 2010 at 11:41 pm
Doesn’t seem as if PH is worried about what Ms. Davy thinks…
By sojourner on March 28th, 2010 at 2:39 am
I realize that Prince Harry may be headed into a Forward Area in the near future, but I am hoping that the MoD will not risk his valuable life yet again. If they care a fig about the condition of my arteries, they shall refrain! I can sense them hardening as I write this.
By Gigi on March 28th, 2010 at 4:03 am
The Daily Star is “reporting” (more likely speculating) that Prince William & Kate will marry in 2011, and include part of the Rugby World Cup (Sept 10 to Oct 22wknd) in New Zealand in their honeymoon plans.
By Evelyn on March 28th, 2010 at 12:24 pm
And how would they know? If the Telegraph or the Times hinted at such a move, I would be inclined to take it seriously, although this couple’s penchant for changing their minds would generate some weary caution.
By John on March 28th, 2010 at 12:28 pm
Saying they will marry is not really the same as saying PW bent and proposed… or is it?
Well, in an excess of caution, and so to not miss an opportunity, let the progressive drinking (of *tea*) begin.
Bottoms Up!
By sojourner on March 28th, 2010 at 3:13 pm
I just read a very interesting article which details the history and traditions of the Household Cavalry Regiment and further explains the units which united to form the Blues and Royals, the regiment to which Prince William and Prince Harry belong.
Regarding Prince William and Kate and their perceived penchant for changing their minds, John, it seems to me that the actual changes have been in the public perception. I believe that there has been a plan and a timeline in place for quite a while, known only to the couple and a small inner circle, which differs from the perceived plans that have been offered up by the media on a regular basis. If that is true, and I cannot believe otherwise, the changes of plans we see in publications are actually not those of Kate and Prince William at all, but of those media persons who choose to speculate. Once again I quote: “Those who speak do not know; those who know do not speak.”
By Gigi on March 28th, 2010 at 3:24 pm
Bravo Gigi!!!
By Mikado-watcher on March 28th, 2010 at 3:49 pm
Party Life, a new “lifestyle” website from Party Pieces, does an interview with KM
http://tinyurl.com/yean3eq
The website itself is rather interesting to check out, in so far as it gives an insight into what up to know has been a fairly obscure company.
By sojourner on March 28th, 2010 at 9:15 pm
I misused “obscure.” I should have said “opaque,” as in its internal working — structure, employees, not to say earnings, etc — remaining out of the public view.
By sojourner on March 28th, 2010 at 9:17 pm
I am shocked that the new Party Pieces blog (see sojourner’s link above) allows comments!
Which of us wants to comment first?
By Dan on March 28th, 2010 at 11:23 pm
Thanks for the link, sojourner! I looked around the website a bit. It looks like Pippa is the main person behind the site, in that the “contact us” link lists her Party Pieces e-mail address. Is Pippa working for Party Pieces now, too?
By Evelyn on March 28th, 2010 at 11:27 pm
I noticed that too. Ms. Middleton Sr
certainly runs a tight family ship!
By sojourner on March 29th, 2010 at 12:59 am
I found the Party Pieces link to be a very beguiling website! I enjoyed looking at it, I must say. Thank you very much, sojourner, for providing the link.
I have just read an article in the Times which reveals that some officious event organizers in Canada have managed to offend Queen Elizabeth II over whether she and the Duke of Edinburgh are fit enough to ascend a 60 degree angled staircase at the Halifax Tattoo. The Queen assured the officials that she is fit enough, but they are adamant and also tactless. It appears that the Queen has chosen to withdraw and I do not blame her at all. To say the least, the matter was mishandled by the Canadian officials. The Queen is 22 years my senior but she can run rings around me and I am hale, hearty and follow a regular exercise program at a gym. As the article makes clear, the Queen still rides regularly. For those of you who are unfamiliar with the extraordinary muscle tone, body balance, strength and stamina required for horseback riding, believe me, the Queen is, indeed, splendidly fit to be able to ride at her age.
By Gigi on March 29th, 2010 at 1:29 am
Tactless, certainly. However, do you want to be know as the organizer that gave the HRM agita because of a ramp? I kind of feel for them, I do.
By sojourner on March 29th, 2010 at 1:36 am
KM’s interview in the Party Life website has been taken down. An excess of traffic, or perhaps an excess of comments? Did you manage to get your comment in, Dan?
By sojourner on March 29th, 2010 at 12:09 pm
When I accessed the site, there were no comments at all. I did not post a comment on that site, just here on RA.
By Gigi on March 29th, 2010 at 1:35 pm
I note that Millie Pilkington is listed as the Party Pieces photographer, not Kate. In fact Kate is not mentioned at all on the magazine site. Comments would be insane as every anti-Kate fanatic round the world would make a beeline for it.
In terms of a previous point that William and Kate have had a firm timeline for years, it was just two years ago that William pulled out, jumping on a pub table shouting “I’m free!”
In the autumn, he went back to her and commentators said he would never be able to leave her again as he would be branded a cad.
Last spring, he did just that. Out of the blue he took up the RAF option at SAR, which could continue until 2013. Call it displacement activity or whatever, but Kate was said to be devastated. So they do change their minds a lot, especially William.
By John on March 29th, 2010 at 2:50 pm
Actually, John, PW&K’s temporary split was three years ago now, in April 2007.
The summer 2011 wedding idea makes some sense. If that were to happen, they could conceivably give the Queen a great-grandchild in time for the celebrations of 2012.
By Evelyn on March 29th, 2010 at 3:37 pm
My dear John, recollect! I did not say that Prince William and Kate’s timeline had been in place “for years.” I said that I am sure that their timeline has been in place for “quite a while,” which I still believe is the case. As a former broker, I certainly remember the importance of presenting my views couched in appropriately veiled language. Grant me that at least!
By Gigi on March 29th, 2010 at 4:59 pm
One more point I must offer. Regarding Prince William declaring “I’m free!” I must say that statement was accurate then and it is accurate now. I realize that social customs and mores have changed, but I hold fast to my belief that no one belongs to anyone until a promise of marriage (the formal engagement) is made and the marriage is solemnized (the wedding.) Kate and Prince William, unless there has been a secret engagement to which we are not privy, are still free.
By Gigi on March 29th, 2010 at 5:03 pm
True enough, Gigi, I merely point out that they have had their ups and downs, and many dates for an engagement have been “pencilled in” by Palace courtiers only to pass without event.
By John on March 29th, 2010 at 5:07 pm
Evelyn, why does my mind’s eye picture their horrified faces at the thought of a 2012 baby?
I agree, though, it would be great PR.
By John on March 29th, 2010 at 5:11 pm
I agree, John. But I do expect that the Queen would be very pleased with a fourth generation in the line of succession. No one could give her a better gift for her Diamond Jubilee than Prince William & Kate. What better way to celebrate the Queen’s long reign?
Or even if PW&K could announce a pregnancy in the first half of 2012, that would be enough.
By Evelyn on March 29th, 2010 at 6:03 pm
The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh endured a number worrisome years waiting for a recalcitrant Charles to agree to wed a suitable consort and sire two fine sons. I have no doubt that they fondly look forward to seeing Prince William and Prince Harry well-matched with life partners and to the birth of great-grandchildren to secure the succession. May Almighty God grant that these happy events take place while the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh are well enough to take great pleasure in the joy and triumph of the save arrival of the new generation in the Royal Family!
By Gigi on March 29th, 2010 at 6:32 pm
I am with John in this one — I do think we discount the disinclination to procreate from both these young people. I believe this is the single most important reason for the delay. As John clearly pointed out, the pressure from the public (or at the very least the press) would be ridiculous. If KM feels invaded now, wait until everyone feels entitled to comment on the state of her womb.
Which is not to say they might not decide to marry within the next year anyway.
By sojourner on March 29th, 2010 at 9:11 pm
Interesting, but not surprising, to see the interview with Kate taken down. But she is still listed as the “cupcake winner.”
Type Kate into the Party Times search bar and you can see the picture of it.
By Dan on March 29th, 2010 at 9:45 pm
Did they show the cupcake she won? I have a feeling, it ain’t made of cake at all….
By sojourner on March 30th, 2010 at 2:34 am
I think the prize has more to do with the decorations than the actual cake itself. But yes, they do show the cupcake– in a pink paper, with pink frosting and pink butterflies.
By Evelyn on March 30th, 2010 at 3:03 am
If our own John had been the deciding judge, the cupcake winner would have been Balmoral Dundee cake!
By Gigi on March 30th, 2010 at 9:02 pm
Gigi! You could create the RA Balmoral Dundee cupcake and enter the contest!!!
By Evelyn on March 30th, 2010 at 9:28 pm
Any Dundee cake will suit me fine.
There’s news tonight that Prince William is now in Cornwall, training for his exams at RAF Culdrose. We welcome him to our West Country region and wish him well with his studies.
One thing seems certain, he won’t see much of Kate until August.
By John on March 30th, 2010 at 9:44 pm
Yes, the Daily Mail’s article on PW’s ski holiday pointed that out. That’s one of the reasons he wanted to take advantage of the unexpected break in his training. I’m glad that he and Kate had a chance to spend time together doing things they both enjoy.
Will he be expected at Windsor for Easter?
By Evelyn on March 31st, 2010 at 3:11 am
John, may I say “we won’t see much of Kate and William until August” ?
By Mikado-watcher on March 31st, 2010 at 5:54 am
Mikado, William will be preparing for his exams and training right through until August. I expect he’ll get a long break then.
By John on March 31st, 2010 at 11:45 am
Evelyn, he will get Easter off but could have other plans, probably secret.
By John on March 31st, 2010 at 11:46 am
Thank you, John. I must say ” good luck” for William.
By Mikado-watcher on March 31st, 2010 at 12:42 pm
Oooh, secret Easter plans…I love a little intrigue
By Julie on March 31st, 2010 at 5:18 pm
My holiday guests arrive in a few hours to spend the rest of Holy Week and Easter with us, so I will take this opportunity to wish all our dear Royal Anecdotes friends a very happy and blessed Easter!
By Gigi on March 31st, 2010 at 5:23 pm
I second that wish for a happy and blessed Easter to all!
By Julie on March 31st, 2010 at 5:25 pm
And to you, Gigi, and to all our readers and contributors.
By John on March 31st, 2010 at 5:26 pm
There’s an interesting tongue-in-cheek piece about Kate in tomorrow’s Telegraph by humorous columnist Bryony Gordon.
LINK
By John on March 31st, 2010 at 7:34 pm
Perhaps she should have posted her opinions about modern architecture on her parent’s party website. That would have satisfied their business plan. (Earth to Mr. Gordon: Party Pieces is devoted to precisely the matters upon which she spoke.)
The fact that this hack is stalking a private family’s business website (a business targeted to families with small children) and then scoffing when he doesn’t find Chaucer says far more about him (and his cohort, the boorish and provincial British press) than it does his purported subject.
By Dan on April 1st, 2010 at 1:42 am
(psst, Dan– Ms. Gordon)
By Evelyn on April 1st, 2010 at 3:03 am
Oops. “Bryony” is not a name I’m familiar with, although I might have guessed.
By Dan on April 1st, 2010 at 1:28 pm
Dan, Bryony Gordon is around Kate’s age and she writes social commentary for intelligent contemporary women. We’ve often said on this site that we’ve not heard Kate speak, nor indeed do we know her views about anything. It would be good to know a little bit more.
Incidentally, you’ll remember when Kate was thinking of setting up a company but stopped because it would mean putting her address and private details in the public domain. Now the government has changed the law so that you can use your registered address (usually a solicitor’s or company formation specialist’s). I’ve just changed mine this morning.
So Kate does have some influence at the highest level.
By John on April 1st, 2010 at 2:01 pm
Does this change mean Kate might set up her own company? Would we know? I suppose the newspapers will be watching for it.
By Evelyn on April 1st, 2010 at 2:38 pm
Evelyn, it does open the way for her to revisit previous plans. I think it was a line in children’s clothes.
We would know because companies are in the public domain and any new business would need to be publicized.
By John on April 1st, 2010 at 2:41 pm
Unless it was a retail business requiring public access, wouldn’t it make more sense to base a new business at her parents’ Berkshire compound? That address is already public knowledge.
I believe Kate is correct to keep quiet until she is made a public figure by an engagement. Otherwise, she’ll be putting the cart before the horse.
Let’s be honest: nothing she says will change anyone’s opinion of her. Only an official status will make such a change possible. At that point, the millions of people who have never heard of her will base their opinion on fresh eyes, not the jaded eyes that have been following her every move and misstep these many years.
Believe it or not, 99.99% of the world will first hear of her on the day the engagement is announced.
By Dan on April 1st, 2010 at 9:52 pm
The Daily Express is reporting that Prince William has been cleared to serve in Northern Ireland, if needed, while in the Search and Rescue team, or anywhere else in the UK. It also says that what base PW will be assigned to will be announced by the end of April.
By Evelyn on April 2nd, 2010 at 3:44 am
happy easter to all!
By coni on April 2nd, 2010 at 8:46 pm
Another non-news piece from the DM, this time claiming that PC has doubts about KM as a suitable royal bride:
http://tinyurl.com/yd7er8y
My reaction – if he has doubts, why didn’t things get resolved by now? I think PW is beginning to look more and more like a repeat of his father. Of course the DM is hardly the most reliable source but people are talking, even here in the US.
By NCKat on April 3rd, 2010 at 12:37 am
KM isn’t royal material but Camilla Parker Bowles is? No offense, but Prince Charles really lowered the bar as to what makes for a suitable Queen Consort when he married his mistress. Not that the DM is a reliable source as has been pointed out. They’re probably just out of things to write by now about this relationship. However, Charles will need to simply get over it if he is in fact jealous of his own son. William is the future of the monarchy everybody knows that. That’s why HM had some of her best people around him helping out when he went to Australia.
By Lizzy on April 3rd, 2010 at 12:50 am
NCKat, the Richard Kay article in the Mail is broadly saying what I’ve been writing here for at least a year.
The absence of an engagement, even with a “this may take some time” attached, is puzzling. I’ve thought for a while now that William’s heart isn’t in it and he’s hoping she will move on. The SAR episode was designed for that purpose, I believe, but it hasn’t shaken her off.
Of course, Kate may wear him down in the end, but very senior people are beginning to mutter, and that could signal the end of it.
As always, we shall see.
By John on April 3rd, 2010 at 8:55 am
Whew. Well I’ve just read every comment since John broke the article we are commenting in. I must say it’s all very interesting and I just wanted to add some ideas.
I have to defend Miss Middleton a bit here and then play devil’s advocate. As far as a career/marriage/etc, maybe she isn’t sure what she wants to do. I certainly don’t and I’m the same age. It doesn’t help that she’s in the media spotlight, so to speak. Just because she has a college degree does not mean she knows what she wants to do. And being the girlfriend of a royal is, I would think, a job in itself. It could be that she is working for her parents. She may be working on a private project. Or, she may just have a problem finding a job in such an economy. (Of course I speak from a US experience, it’s awful trying to get a job over here! I’m not sure how it is over there.) She has the golden ticket to get a job anywhere in anything, but maybe, just maybe, she is a good enough person NOT to use that golden ticket to her advantage, and is thus, stuck between the proverbial rock and a hard place. We must keep this in mind when commenting on her not having a job we are all privy to.
On the other hand, we see that Prince William has carved himself a career, as has Prince Harry and even Chelsy Davy. So my opinion on her not really knowing where she wants to head as far as a career is concerned seems to be at least a little on target, no?
As for everyone saying a wedding will be at this year or next (i.e. the 2011 suggestion) I have to say that you can throw dates out all you want and eventually (hopefully for everyone’s sake, especially Gigi
) it will happen and those people will be able to say “Oh! We called it!” Until a direct date or an announcement comes out of the mouths of Royals, I can only sigh and say, again and hope we all take a moment to inhale, take a sip of tea, and exhale, hoping the next bell to ring will not be a false, hopeful report, but wedding bells themselves. 
I can’t help but think we are all cats who are chasing a ribbon being carried around by the Royal hand, not really in any direction and at the mercy of those behind the scenes. I’m sure it’s hurtful for Miss Middleton to see negative comments and, I imagine, extremely hard to keep quiet and not defend herself to her critics. She either has a very tough skin or a very good support group and boyfriend who has assured her that all of this will pass. It seems that to get through such criticism she may have firm plans with Prince William in place, and thus, is not bothered by all of the gossip.
So I say to you my fellow RAers, let us not spread cynicism, but hope for best wishes and health on our favorite Royals.
I raise my tea to you and hope you are all happy, well and have a blessed Easter.
Cheers.
By Meg on April 3rd, 2010 at 9:03 am
I apologize for such a long post. I just couldn’t keep quiet any longer.
By Meg on April 3rd, 2010 at 9:04 am
Quite right, Meg, nor should you.
By John on April 3rd, 2010 at 9:07 am
Amanda Platell has also got some stern things to say about Kate in today’s Mail. Scroll down a bit. LINK
By John on April 3rd, 2010 at 9:22 am
I think the Mail article reads not like a summary of past news, but a summary of us RAers’ astute discussion over the past years. They ought to be citing us with footnotes.
As for Amanda Platell, the poor sad girl is a Royal wannabe, driven mad by jealousy, vexed that she’s been beaten out by a woman of greater beauty, temperament, and discretion.
By Dan on April 3rd, 2010 at 4:32 pm
I rather like Amanda Platell – she writes a lot of common sense and what she’s saying about KM is no less than what a lot of others are saying. I certainly don’t see her as a Royal “wannabe” and I doubt very much she’d be willing to fit into the firm.
By NCKat on April 3rd, 2010 at 4:44 pm
UGH I am SO tired of the whole issue of her not working. Why does anyone who is part of a wealthy family that doesn’t mind supporting them have to work? I am a teacher, I am 28 years old, and I am hoping to change careers soon because my job SUCKS (testing in the US is out of control).
So I am the same age as Kate and I’ve worked for 6 years all to realize I chose the wrong career. Why should she be forced to do a job just for the sake of saying she has a common job. I’d say traveling and helping with the parent’s business is a great way to spend you time if you enjoy it. Years ago it seemed fashion/art were her interest-but that sets her up to be in the public eye too much.
I’m not British so it isn’t in my culture-this whole royal thing. From my small town Southern girl perspective, to be royal means NOT to work like most people (outside of representing your country, dressing up, and appearing at events!) so isn’t Kate doing just that? She doesn’t have a 9-5 job like the rest of us. She is special! She gets to get dressed up in pretty Issa dresses and go to fundraisers with the Prince. How is that NOT suitable? He doesn’t need to marry someone who practiced law (like Chelsey D). What good will that do? He needs a wife who is pretty, intelligent to the degree they can carry on interviews/conversations, well-mannered, and FERTILE!
Anyways- Life is too short. Enjoy it while you can. She is not hurting anyone by doing nothing (possibly only herself based on all this nasty press).
By happydally on April 3rd, 2010 at 11:26 pm
In the Daily Mail, Katie Nicholl is reporting that Prince Charles & Camilla will not be at Windsor for Easter this year. They’re at Birkhall celebrating their 5th wedding anniverary, and planting some trees in their garden to mark their “wood” anniversary.
I wonder who will join the Queen & Prince Philip at Windsor.
By Evelyn on April 4th, 2010 at 12:03 am
happydally:
Your comment is the best response I’ve heard to date regarding the continuing saga of Prince William and Kate Middleton. I agree with everything you said 100%.
By Arthur on April 4th, 2010 at 1:19 am
From photos on Getty Images, it looks like these Royals attended Easter worship with the Queen: Prince Philip, Princess Anne (but not her husband), Prince Andrew, Princess Beatrice, Princess Eugenie. Small group this year.
By Evelyn on April 4th, 2010 at 12:29 pm
Happydally, I think Kate is often the victim of a backlash against William for his reluctance to make his intentions plain.
He often seems to be drifting, pulled this way and that by conflicting forces, never quite crystallizing as a fully-rounded personality who knows his own mind.
Unfortunately, compliant Kate plays into that role, seemingly content to walk three paces behind him. What William needs, I think, is someone who will help him resolve his issues and firm up his intentions. Dare I say it, someone like Chelsy Davy.
Otherwise, he could drift through his life as if it never existed.
By John on April 4th, 2010 at 12:34 pm
Dare I say it, John – just like his father? Charles has only come into his own in the last few years in a more visible way.
By NCKat on April 4th, 2010 at 12:39 pm
I think you’re right, NCKat. As William’s great-great uncle put it: “Something must be done!”
By John on April 4th, 2010 at 12:46 pm
Now let me make it clear that I am not a Kate-basher, that I rather like her as possible consort. It’s just that I think she needs to risk a little bit more public scrutiny by showing a public face for charity projects if nothing else. It’s what she’ll be expected to do as William’s wife and sitting around in her parents’ house working on their website doesn’t show a person who’d be interested in the job as a consort to a future king. I like Chelsy a lot more because she’s not afraid to do what she wants and goes for it. Harry’s a very lucky man.
If it’s William who won’t commit publicly, then shame on him. If it’s Charles who is holding him back then shame on him, too, but I don’t think he’d relish the prospect of another debacle, that is, force William to marry someone he really doesn’t want to.
By NCKat on April 4th, 2010 at 1:02 pm
Are the Middletons shooting themselves in the foot? Apparently they are now offering a line of lower-cost wedding party merchandise. Do you think this will give more fodder for the anti-Kate forces in CH?
By NCKat on April 5th, 2010 at 11:41 am
With a name like “Party Pieces,” they are wise to offer things for every conceivable kind of party, and what kind of party is more thing-oriented than a wedding?
The Middleton’s will be criticized no matter what they sell. Can you imagine if they began a line of office-party ware?
“What does Waity Katie know about the office?” Blah, blah, blah.
By Dan on April 5th, 2010 at 2:30 pm
My dear John–that line you quoted, “Something must be done!” was said by the Duke of Windsor, while he was touring the economically depressed areas, and while he was still Prince of Wales. It gave momentary hope to the Kingdom, which was soon dashed when King George V died and that same man, now King, refused to be crowned and abdicated, leaving the people, his family, the Kingdom and the Monarchy at the edge of despair. That quotation has ever after been an example of an insincere, self-serving statement, which clearly it was.
Regarding Party Pieces, I feel the Middleton’s are wise to expand their company and the wedding supply area is certainly appropriate and profitable.
I am a bit puzzled by HELLO Magazine’s article regarding Easter services at Windsor. They imply that only a few Royals attended, but Getty Images show far more were there, including the Princess Royal, her husband, the Earl and Countess of Wessex, the Duke of York, Princess Beatrice of York and Princess Eugenie of York, and of course the Queen, looking marvelous in a violet ensemble and the Duke of Edinburgh. By my count, that means that the Queen and Prince Philip shared Easter services with all their children except for Charles, who apparently chose to spend Easter at Birkhall with Camilla. Does anyone know where Prince William and Prince Harry spent Easter? I was just wondering.
By Gigi on April 5th, 2010 at 4:02 pm
There was a report that Prince Harry was at a wedding in Wales recently, but as I read the report, I wasn’t sure if it was Easter weekend or earlier.
I must say that if the wedding was this last weekend, I’m surprised. In our area, no church weddings are allowed on Easter weekend, due to religious sensitivities.
By Evelyn on April 5th, 2010 at 4:43 pm
Evelyn, in the (American branch of the) Anglican church, weddings aren’t even allowed in Lent. But I’m sure it couldn’t have been Easter weekend unless it was a purely civil union and not a Christian wedding.
By Leslie on April 5th, 2010 at 5:03 pm
I read that report and wondered about that also, Evelyn. In the Catholic Church, there are no weddings during Holy Week, I do not believe. During the late 1800′s in both Europe and America, weddings in both the Catholic and in the Reform Churches did not take place during Lent, although that custom was altered by the World Wars and the expediency necessitated by the citizen soldier leaving suddenly for the front. During the years of my childhood, weddings were always on Saturdays, never on a weekday and certainly never on Sundays. That custom has changed, however, as we have been to a number of weddings in recent years held in Protestant churches or in non-church venues celebrated on weekdays and on Sundays. Perhaps the same changes have occurred in Wales.
By Gigi on April 5th, 2010 at 5:04 pm
In Britain, Easter is thought the ideal time for weddings. Although much has changed under Labour, we don’t have any restrictions here on weddings — as far as I’m aware. I know clergy tends to be busy over the holidays, but an Easter ceremony is much sought after.
As for “Something must be done,” it’s widely seen as jocular over here, a line spun by someone who can’t deliver.
By John on April 5th, 2010 at 5:16 pm
While we are talking about weddings held in close proximity to major religious holidays, I feel I must reveal that my husband, then in uniform during the Vietnam War years, and I married on December 26th, inconveniencing everyone in our entire extended family and circle of friends, many of whom braved bad winter weather and perilous travel conditions to be with us for our church wedding! Larry had a 48 hour leave and we were very fortunate that my Mother was able to plan and execute a traditional and formal church wedding for us in the two short months we gave her after Larry’s CO officially granted him the leave for the wedding!
By Gigi on April 5th, 2010 at 6:03 pm
Here in the US, where we have separation of Church and State, the “rule” of no weddings during Holy Week isn’t a government restriction. The restriction has come from the Church, not because clergy are busy, but because Holy Saturday is the day Christ lay in the tomb. I’m surprised that clergy in the UK aren’t still observing the holiness of the Three Days.
By Evelyn on April 5th, 2010 at 6:11 pm
I am surprised also, Evelyn. However, the current Archbishop of Canterbury seems to me to take a relaxed approach to Canon Law, doctrine and sacramentals, so perhaps it is not as surprising as it first appeared. From Holy Thursday evening, which commemorates when Christ was arrested, called before the Sanhedrin, turned over to Roman authorities and sentenced to death, until the evening of Holy Saturday, no sacrament of any kind may be celebrated in the church. The altar is stripped, holy statues and icons are veiled with cloth and drapery and the Host, which is the Body of Christ, is taken to a side chapel or room which has been prepared to simulate, first, the Garden of Gethsemane, and then the Tomb, hewn out of rock, which belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, where Christ lay until He Rose from the dead. The Episcopal and Catholic Churches here in America strictly adhere to the sanctity of Holy Week.
By Gigi on April 5th, 2010 at 10:14 pm
ABC News in the US is quoting Tina Brown of the Daily Beast reporting that June 3 and 4 have been “mysteriously blocked out on the Palace diaries,” perhaps the time of an engagement announcement. Speculation is that a Royal Wedding would follow in November, the same month the Queen and the Duke were married.
http://tinyurl.com/ycabebs
By Dan on April 6th, 2010 at 2:17 pm
Here’s the Daily Beast article by Tina Brown:
http://tinyurl.com/yl2gk3o
By Dan on April 6th, 2010 at 2:22 pm
Dan, I don’t know how Tina Brown has access to the Buckingham Palace diaries, but even so, if they are anything like mine, lots of dates are blocked off with a code letter or number. If every one of them referred to a marriage or engagement, I’d be a multiple bigamist by now.
By John on April 6th, 2010 at 3:03 pm
Either Tina Brown has a “mole” in Buckingham Palace or she has an overactive imagination geared to marketing her writings. In any case, as ever, we shall have to be patient and wait to see what transpires. The Queen and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, were married in November and remain happily married to this day, which indicates that a November wedding date for Prince William and Kate would allay the superstitious terrors of those who fear that a child of a divorced couple is far more likely to fall prey to a dissolution of his/her own marriage. It is devoutly to be wished that the person or persons keeping the Queen’s calendar are conscientious to a fault and have not caused the afore-mentioned curious mole to make an ill-conceived assumption by creating a lapse in data. If this continues to occur, the suspense may well prove unendurable!
By Gigi on April 6th, 2010 at 5:00 pm
Ahhh, this month’s random wild guess…sigh! I’m not holding my breath that’s for sure
By Julie on April 6th, 2010 at 5:54 pm
Tina Brown is more highly regarded than most of our Royal watchers, and hardly needs a bit of Royal gossip to generate hits at her website. Still, her tip is based on the typical “high-placed source in royal circles” who so often lead us all astray.
What does it mean to “block out” two days from the Palace calendar? Does that mean no one cuts a ribbon for two days?
Why would it take two days to announce an engagement?
By Dan on April 6th, 2010 at 7:36 pm
Weeell,
PW has been a bit slow about the whole engagement thing so far, so maybe more of the same for the actual announcement?
But at least we have one wait over… elections are on!
By sojourner on April 6th, 2010 at 8:15 pm
You may just be right, Sojourner. Gordon Brown is as reluctant to face his fate as Prince William is.
What are we to make of that?
By John on April 6th, 2010 at 8:51 pm
Since everyone has weddings on the brain, I have a question. Has Her Majesty and Prince Philip ever renewed their wedding vows? Or is that not something the royals usually do?
I read a Telegraph article today about Prince William “playing a casualty” for some of his training. I just couldn’t help but be so proud of him. I’m so glad the Princes have found something they seem to love to do.
By Meg on April 6th, 2010 at 9:00 pm
Insofar as I can recall, I do not believe that a Royal Monarch and consort have formally renewed their wedding vows. Perhaps this custom is more American than European or even British. As for the election being called–at long last–for May 6, I must say that it will take place not a second too soon! I am very relieved that I did not choose to hold my breath while waiting! I would be thoroughly expired.
By Gigi on April 6th, 2010 at 11:18 pm
Both the Daily Mail and the Telegraph have picked up Tina Brown’s story on the June 3-4 engagement announcement. DM has added that Prince William is scheduled to be in training at RAF Valley on those dates.
By Evelyn on April 7th, 2010 at 1:12 pm
This is taking on aspects of Samuel Beckett’s play, Waiting for Godot.
As I remember it, I was so bored, I left before the end.
By John on April 7th, 2010 at 1:21 pm
Actually, John, I was thinking of the Christopher Guest film, “Waiting for Guffman,” where everything takes on an absurdist tinge as everyone importantly contributes his or her impressions throughout the film. I will just sit tight and see if Tina Brown is correct.
Has anyone thought that the blacked-out dates simply mean nothing is happening on those dates? Just sayin’
By NCKat on April 7th, 2010 at 1:33 pm
One other point, Tina Brown’s Diana book — which in my estimation is the best one out there — will have given her many contacts in and around the Palace.
Someone could have told her this, although that’s by no means a guarantee of authenticity. Also, blank spaces do not a wedding make.
By John on April 7th, 2010 at 1:42 pm
Funny John! That’s exactly how I felt about that play…nothing to come could have been worth waiting…and it wasn’t. I had to sit there as it was a school assignment.
By Julie on April 7th, 2010 at 1:47 pm
Hello all,
I was surfing the web and caught something about William & Kate on CNN and I went …WAIT…what was that about an engagement? LOL!
Yes, even CNN has this piece of gossip posted on their front page. I came here to see what everyone was thinking and to get John’s take on it
See I know the RIGHT place to come for news and commentary!
By MikeH on April 7th, 2010 at 2:27 pm
Hi Mike
Over here, most of the nationals have picked this up — Tina Brown is a big name in journalistic circles. But St James Palace, the office of William and Harry, is strongly denying this story. I think I believe them, and my own negative hunch, rather than the excitable press, desperate for a non-election story.
By John on April 7th, 2010 at 2:34 pm
I am beginning to wish that the media would suspend their speculation regarding the engagement and wedding. If, as some believe, Prince William is commitment shy, the pressure of public speculation may induce the Prince to further refrain from taking the step. In any event, the media stories call attention to the situation, which is not helpful. Prince William strongly resists being pressured by others and has a deeply instilled distrust of the media, after all. Let the clamoring voices cease, for all our sakes.
By Gigi on April 7th, 2010 at 3:14 pm
Actually, I don’t believe St. James’s Palace has denied the engagement story. They have declined to comment on the Prince’s private life or on speculation, which is not the same as a denial.
But only time will tell.
By Dan on April 7th, 2010 at 3:23 pm
Tina Brown must like the attention her Royal stories generate. Today she’s featuring a slide show of Diana and Kate’s similar outfits over the years.
I suppose when people appear in public so often, it’s not hard to find matching shapes and colors.
http://tinyurl.com/ye4wmvf
By Dan on April 7th, 2010 at 3:45 pm
I think the two people who could most effectively encourage Prince William to announce his engagement would be his grandparents. If the Queen and Prince Philip believe that Kate is a good life-mate for their grandson, I don’t think any questions about the appropriateness of Kate’s lineage or “common” family background would stand in their way.
After divorces among three of their four children, the Queen & PP both understand the importance of their grandchildren having stable married lives. In Prince William’s case, the future of the monarchy may depend upon it.
By Evelyn on April 7th, 2010 at 3:46 pm
Is this an announcement of the engagement announcement?
By Mikado-watcher on April 7th, 2010 at 4:34 pm
No, this is speculation about when an engagement announcement MAY happen.
By Evelyn on April 7th, 2010 at 5:57 pm
Heaven help us–things have come to a pretty pass. Now we are reduced to speculating upon the speculation regarding the announcement of the announcement.
I fear I am laughing helplessly, like a hyena! (Thank goodness there is no audio capability on the RA site!!) At least we shall have the very welcome distraction of the Queen’s dear birthday later this month. She was born Princess Elizabeth Alexandra Mary of York on April 21, 1926.
By Gigi on April 7th, 2010 at 7:01 pm
Gigi, you may console yourself with the prospect we could soon have a descendant of William IV in 10 Downing Street, while the future William V, who went to the same school, is likely, at some stage to become Prince of Wales.
As the Mail’s Richard Littlejohn might say: You couldn’t make it up.
By John on April 7th, 2010 at 7:07 pm
I didn’t know David Miliband was descended from William IV.
By Dan on April 7th, 2010 at 7:41 pm
Dan, the Miliband brothers are descended from Belgian Marxists — and it shows. We are taking about, as I’m sure you know, David Cameron.
By John on April 7th, 2010 at 7:46 pm
According to the Telegraph, Clarence House is nixing rumors of an engagement announcement on June 3-4. Prince William and Prince Charles both have public engagements those days, and the Queen has an official engagement on June 3. So someone gave Ms Brown some misinformation about the palace calendar.
By Evelyn on April 7th, 2010 at 9:09 pm
I don’t see why an engagement announcement would require the blocking out of days on the calendar, unless the announcement were to be made in public by William himself.
But to be precise: no denial has been issued. The Clarence House spokesman said HM, Charles, and William have engagements those days. The spokesman has therefore referred to things that WILL take place, but did not confirm that something (like an announcement) will NOT take place.
Since they never comment on the Prince’s private life, I would be surprised to hear CH declare that an announcement will not happen. They will let speculation continue.
By Dan on April 7th, 2010 at 9:52 pm
I don’t think William and Kate take more than an hour to make the announcement, so if the story is true, he can attend to other engagements as well.
This is an exciting story but I don’t think William would give people around him two month notice. It’s too long to keep a secret.
By Mikado-watcher on April 7th, 2010 at 10:00 pm
My recollection of the announcement of Charles’ engagement to Lady Diana (as she was then) is that it was a photo op at which a few questions were permitted (one of which was answered disastrously by Charles, but what else is new) and the engagement ring was viewed. I clearly recall the sapphire blue ensemble worn by the beautiful Diana, and the stunning engagement ring, featuring a very large, superb sapphire which was surrounded by diamonds. I believe it took less than an hour, as Dan recalls. As for blocking out two days on the calendar at Buckingham Palace, I cannot imagine why that would be necessary, except for staff to manage the media, who, I am certain, will go certifiably crazy when the engagement is formally announced. Also, it would not do for the Queen or the Duke of Edinburgh to be out of the country at the time of the announcement of the engagement and impending marriage of the future King of England, nor, I assume, would they wish to be absent. Presumably, Charles would wish to be accessible as well.
By Gigi on April 7th, 2010 at 10:27 pm
I agree Gigi. I can’t imagine what a circus it will be when an announcement is actually made. They may just need two days to let the media calm down and the people to have their lavish tea parties.
I was thinking about all of this today while doing dishes and came to the conclusion that the amount of time they have been dating, coupled with their “break-up” a while back has all been very good if the Royal Family are testing Kate and her own family. Not that they would do that, but I’m sure it probably hasn’t gone unnoticed how Kate and her family react (or don’t react) to criticisms and praises in the media. Best to be extremely sure you are with someone you can trust and who you love than to just jump into marriage blind.
I wish I had been around to see the hype leading up to Diana and Charles. It may have helped us now in deciphering the movements of the family in regards to an announcement of some kind.
Or not. We do live in nuttier times.
By Meg on April 8th, 2010 at 12:32 am
Quite true, Meg. Princess Diana was a member of a noble family which had close contact with the Royal Family all throughout her childhood. Her father was an Earl who had some association with the Royals. As a result, they reacted calmly to the courtship, engagement and marriage. Princess Diana’s older sister had dated Charles for a time prior to Charles’ courting of Diana, and Princess Diana’s Grandmother, had been a friend of and a lady in waiting to the Queen Mother, if I recall correctly. The husband of another of Princess Diana’s sisters was a courtier at Buckingham Palace, a position which caused some strain later on when Charles’ and Diana’s marriage faltered. Nevertheless, I must agree that the Middleton family is handling the strain and intrusion of media interest in Kate’s association with Prince William very well, and, like Kate, they are conducting themselves with grace and poise.
By Gigi on April 8th, 2010 at 12:57 am
What everyone seems to be forgetting is that William will be swotting and training hard for his final exams in July/August. Why would he encourage a tidal wave of press interest and intrusion in early June? It really doesn’t make sense.
By John on April 8th, 2010 at 11:05 am
John, how confident are you that Labor will lose the upcoming election? Brown seems filled with unholy optimism recently. This morning the newspapers quote him promising that he’ll remain five more years as Prime Minister if his party wins the election. The idea of even another year of Brown makes me ill.
By Gigi on April 8th, 2010 at 11:11 am
John, I was thinking of that last night. William is safely away from the press maelstrom as he goes about his duties in the RAF and seems to be dodging everything. No wonder Katie’s in the bolthole of her parents’ home. I do wish he’d man up a bit and release some sort of statement rather than let the speculations go wild.
Was the anticipation this intense in the UK whilst waiting for Elizabeth to announce her engagement to Phillip?
By NCKat on April 8th, 2010 at 11:21 am
Gigi, the polls are all over the place: from a Tory 4% lead up to a 10% lead. Trouble is, they need to poll between 8 and 10% more than Labour just to have the same number of seats. Many of us believe Labour has gerrymandered the Boundaries system to give them this massive advantage.
However, the more the public sees of Brown, the more they dislike him. The three 90-minute leaders’ debates could see him crash and burn. Already the TV commentators have shown up his lies and they are becoming quite aggressive with him. Adam Boulton mangled him last night on Sky News.
At some point, Cameron will take off and the deed will be done, I’m sure.
The worst that could happen would be a hung Parliament, with the Tories having more seats than Labour but no overall majority. In that case, Cameron will team with the LibDems or run a minority government leading to another General Election, perhaps in the autumn or next spring.
I expect a comfortable Conservative victory, however.
By John on April 8th, 2010 at 11:33 am
NCKat, things were different in those days. People waited patiently for announcements. There was little media around to make a fuss.
But, after the war, there was a huge appetite for spectacle and Royal events.
Today, there are so many tacky celebrity weddings that the edge has been taken off the Royal brand. However, I expect a great deal of interest if/when it happens.
By John on April 8th, 2010 at 11:37 am
Once an announcement is made, I think “swotting and training hard” at SAR would be just the place for William to maintain some order amidst the inevitable chaos. How better to keep the press at bay?
It’s far better for him to be tucked away and regimented during his engagement period than to be out in public, where his every movement would be impeded by throngs of photographers.
By Dan on April 8th, 2010 at 3:17 pm
WHAT? And leave Kate to deal with all that? I don’t think so!
That may be great for PW but not so much for her. Sorry, Dan but I hope that is not how this breaks down for them. Unless they find a way to tuck Kate away as well.
By Julie on April 8th, 2010 at 3:25 pm
John, as for the wedding…I must say, they won’t be able to win. If it is huge and lavish, people will complain about the money spent and if it is smaller and intimate WE will complain
How to be more amazing than the tacky weddings you mention and yet not cost the earth…it’s conundrum isn’t it?
By Julie on April 8th, 2010 at 3:28 pm
When the announcement is made I expect Kate will move into Clarence House or Buckingham Palace, where she will finally gain full security. Wasn’t Sophie moved into Buckingham Palace when her engagement to Prince Edward was announced?
I hope the event takes place in Westminster Abbey, a return to tradition for the wedding of a future monarch.
By Dan on April 8th, 2010 at 4:11 pm
I would hope she’d move into one of the palaces, for her own safety, Dan.
I somehow can’t see William agreeing to Westminster Abbey, I would think it would be too much of a reminder of his mother’s funeral. I’m hoping for St. George’s Chapel at Windsor, myself, which is a beautiful venue and would allow it to be slightly smaller event.
By Leslie on April 8th, 2010 at 4:18 pm
Or could an apartment be made available to Kate at St James Palace, where Prince William and Prince Harry have their office? Princess Beatrice has an apartment there, so Kate wouldn’t be totally alone. Do others live there, too?
From what I’ve heard of some courtiers’ opinions of PW marrying a “commoner,” I wonder if BP or CH would be healthy for Kate.
By Evelyn on April 8th, 2010 at 4:19 pm
Evelyn, Diana was a “commoner” despite her aristocratic roots, so was the Queen Mother. I don’t that is a problem for Kate. Her relatives, though, pose a greater risk.
As for moving Kate into one of the Palaces, that will surely happen, and St James’s seems ideal, given that William lives there too. Edward and Sophie shared an apartment at Buckingham Palace (I believe) even before they were engaged.
But, on the wider point, William would surely not announce an engagement which would keep him from his studies for days coming up to his final exams. Unless, of course, he would like to fail them.
By John on April 8th, 2010 at 4:24 pm
I don’t imagine William having a complex about Westminster Abbey just because his mother’s funeral took place there. Isn’t that what churches are for — Sundays, weddings and funerals?
I don’t know many people who leave their church because a loved one’s life was celebrated there. I hope William has a firm respect for tradition, and for that matter, is made of sterner stuff.
By Dan on April 8th, 2010 at 4:47 pm
Oh, John…ever the realist
By Julie on April 8th, 2010 at 4:47 pm
Holy cow, Camilla has broken her leg!
By Dan on April 8th, 2010 at 4:48 pm
Dan, I was thinking that exact thing!
By Julie on April 8th, 2010 at 4:49 pm
Sorry, here’s the link:
http://tinyurl.com/yg2g7yc
By Dan on April 8th, 2010 at 4:49 pm
Oops, about the church, not Camilla
By Julie on April 8th, 2010 at 4:50 pm
Author: Dan
Comment:
“I don’t imagine William having a complex about Westminster Abbey just because his mother’s funeral took place there. Isn’t that what churches are for — Sundays, weddings and funerals?”
Yes, that’s exactly what they’re for and if it was his normal Sunday local parish where he’d spent a significant portion of his life worshipping like most of us do, I would agree with you. But it’s not. It’s a huge sprawling abbey where he’s probably only been a small handfull of times and that is, without a doubt, his strongest association with the place. I don’t think it’s the same as comparing it to a regular church where one grows up and spends a lot of time.
By Leslie on April 8th, 2010 at 5:03 pm
It will also be the location of his coronation. Regardless of PW’s past associations with the Abbey, he will come in contact with it regularly over his life. Maybe the wedding would be a good time to bring a more positive association to the forefront.
By Evelyn on April 8th, 2010 at 6:09 pm
I suppose they could marry in St. George’s Chapel at Windsor, although it holds fewer people. Security would be far easier to plan.
I just found a bit of trivia at St. George’s website. The previous King of Sweden (Grandfather of the current King) married a granddaughter of Queen Victoria in the Chapel in 1905. He reigned from 1950 to 1973, and was made a Knight of the Garter in 1954. The future Queen of Sweden, aptly named Victoria, is marrying this summer, and St. George’s Chapel is featured in a documentary about past Swedish Royal Weddings.
So there is a tradition of future monarchs marrying at Windsor.
By Dan on April 8th, 2010 at 7:08 pm
Albeit a future monarch from another country….
By Evelyn on April 8th, 2010 at 7:48 pm
Wedding venues for Prince William and Kate Middleton. St. Paul’s Cathedral is out, because that’s where Prince William’s parents were married. Westminster Abbey is out, because that’s where the funeral of Prince William’s mother was held. St. George’s Chapel, Windsor, is out, because that is where the wedding blessing was conducted following the marriage of Prince William’s father and step-mother, the woman Diana called “the rottweiler” and the third person in Diana’s marriage to Prince Charles. My point is, something unpleasant from Prince William’s life can be associated with all three locations.
I believe tradition will have more to do with selecting a venue than past events in Prince William’s life. King George VI and Queen Elizabeth, William’s great-grandparents, were married in Westminister Abbey and appear to have had a happy marriage. The Queen and Prince Philip were married in the Abbey and they have had a successful sixty plus years of marriage. If my memory serves me, Westminster Abbey was considered for the wedding of Prince Charles and Lady Diana , except it was deemed too small to hold the number of guests invited to their wedding.
Prince William is not Prince of Wales, so his marriage will probably be smaller than his father’s and mother’s; however, it will be a grand occasion more worthy of Westminster Abbey than Saint George’s Chapel, Windsor. Of course, this is just my two cents worth. I haven’t been tipped off by any courtiers.
By Arthur on April 8th, 2010 at 10:40 pm
I agree with you completely, Arthur. There would be many more reasons to have the wedding at Westminster than to have it elsewhere, mainly tradition. The novelty of PW’s parents wedding at St Paul’s might have been the new tradition if their marriage had been long and happy, but given how things turned out for Charles and Diana, it will be awhile before any future monarch dares try that again. Certainly not in Charles’ lifetime.
By Evelyn on April 9th, 2010 at 1:53 am
Jan Moir has an article in the Mail on “Waity Katie”, but concludes “it can’t be long now”. Hmmm. LINK
By John on April 9th, 2010 at 9:01 am
What an odd article. How often can “journalists” print and reprint the same musings with nothing new added?
By Dan on April 9th, 2010 at 2:33 pm
I agree…what a silly piece!
By Julie on April 9th, 2010 at 3:39 pm
Saint George’s Chapel looks plenty lovely to me, and I imagine it’s a great favorite of the Family, especially HM. Have a look around its website.
http://www.stgeorges-windsor.org/
By Dan on April 9th, 2010 at 4:03 pm
St. George’s is absolutely beautiful, Dan, and I suspect it would feel much more like “home” to Prince William, as its near to the Queen’s heart.
By Leslie on April 9th, 2010 at 4:11 pm
Katie Nicholl has commented to CBS News about the June engagement story, saying essentially that it might be accurate, but who knows?
She suggests that W&K will want a smaller and more private wedding than Charles and Diana had. I wonder: is there a long list of people (government ministers, other Royal Families) who are more or less required to be invited? There are married Crown Princes in Denmark, Norway, Spain, Japan…. Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden is marrying this summer.
Do we know whether William has any acquaintance with these future Kings and Queens, and does protocol dictate that they be on his guest list?
By Dan on April 9th, 2010 at 4:48 pm
Wikipedia has a list of royal and non-royal weddings at St George’s, including Prince Albert Edward, the Prince of Wales (future King Edward VII) and Princess Alexandra, in 1863.
I expect that security would be much easier (and less expensive) at Windsor than at the London venues. Would there be enough room for all the guests?
By Evelyn on April 9th, 2010 at 4:52 pm
Speaking of wedding invitations, I wonder who will attend the Swedish Royal Wedding on 19 June. Seems like William would be the obvious choice, and it would be an appropriate stage upon which to introduce his future Queen to the world.
By Dan on April 9th, 2010 at 7:11 pm
Much of what seems appropriate for PW to attend often is not attended… And PW could not possibly attend with KM, for they could possibly upstage the wedding couple, and that is a severe no-no. (I say this not because they are more important, but rather because they have greater media following). I suspect that PC and DC where the ones pegged to go, but wonder how it will all work out now given DC’s recent interlude in the rabbit hole.
By sojourner on April 9th, 2010 at 10:29 pm
Camilla should be fine by mid-June. The cast will come off before the end of May.
By Evelyn on April 10th, 2010 at 12:09 am
I read some time ago, unfortunately I can’t remember where, that Princess Anne is going to represent Queen Elizabeth at Crown Princess Victoria’s wedding in June.
By Arthur on April 10th, 2010 at 3:49 am
You know, John, the article you linked to was interesting. Sure it repeats what everyone has been saying for years now, but it really kind of reaffirms suspicions that PW and KM have an understanding in place. Her seemingly endless patience and her chin-up all-smiles attitude is not that of a person waiting for William to propose. I think if she’s waiting for anything it’s an official announcement to the public, which is probably easier to wait around for than an actual down-on-his-knee event. But how she and everyone in royal circles would be keeping this a secret is so beyond me that you have to wonder if there is any agreement in place at all.
The CBS article that I think Dan is referring to (or one I just read) shows some very good reasons they won’t wed anytime soon (reasons that have already been thrown around here at RA). The one that convinces me is his love for the Queen and how he will not take away attention to her Diamond Jubilee Celebration.
You can count me as one who believes they have an unofficial engagement, but will wait until conditions are perfect to spring it on everyone. I don’t think people in royal circles would be accepting her if there wasn’t something already vaguely in place.
By Meg on April 10th, 2010 at 4:56 am
Arthur, I recall reading that somewhere, also, or perhaps it is just an impression I acquired. It is my impression that the Princess Royal will represent the Queen at the Royal Wedding of Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden and I imagine that Timothy Laurence will accompany the Princess Royal.
By Gigi on April 10th, 2010 at 2:55 pm
Let’s hope Princess Anne gets a nice, new dress for the occasion. Wasn’t it last summer that she wore the dress she wore to Charles & Diana’s wedding almost 30 years ago to another wedding?
By Evelyn on April 10th, 2010 at 4:10 pm
The Mail on Sunday reports:
- “As far as [Prince William & Kate] are concerned, they are engaged and enjoying their lives….”
- PW will learn this Thursday which SAR squadron he’ll fly with, and where he’ll be stationed for the next 36 months. If PW&K are to marry anytime soon, this will be where Kate will start her life as a Royal wife.
- SAR training will finish up in January 2011.
By Evelyn on April 10th, 2010 at 10:31 pm
Yeah, I saw that and this part made me see red:
‘When Charles was 28, he had been Prince of Wales for eight years. He left the Navy in 1976 and stepped up to a life of full-time Royal duty. And, on the advice of his uncle, Earl Mountbatten, he sowed his wild oats.
‘That, you could argue, didn’t go terribly well for him. But there is part of Charles that is concerned that William was very young when he and Kate started dating.
‘He knows generations have different expectations and different attitudes but he does wonder if the model of his own bachelorhood is more the pattern William should be following when, in all respects, he’s doing quite the opposite.’
My comment: William has every right to approach his relationships the way he does; in fact, in my opinion. “sowing wild oats” today is much more dangerous than when Charles was 28. I’d think he’d be glad his son is so stable!
By NCKat on April 10th, 2010 at 10:41 pm
With so many STDs now– many that can’t be cured– it’s much wiser for Prince William to take better care of his reproductive health. And the same is true of any woman PW would marry– the future of the Royal Family depends on her reproductive health.
Long ago, we had a conversation about whether IVF would be allowed, for instance.
I also read The Mail’s piece on the legal advice given to Prince Charles before he married Camilla. It would be interesting if their marriage was judged illegal for a Royal. Would that mean Charles would not be able to be crowned king, in the fullness of time? Would the crown then bypass Charles and go straight to Prince William?
By Evelyn on April 10th, 2010 at 11:00 pm
Nothing can prevent Charles from taking the throne short of abdication, and I’d bet that’s what would happen if the marriage was declared illegal. However that’s highly unlikely at this point.
By NCKat on April 10th, 2010 at 11:06 pm
Evelyn, the Swedish Court has announced that Crown Princess Victoria’s wedding will be an afternoon ceremony followed by a dinner. Dress code will most likely be white tie or military dress for the men and long gown and tiara for the women. Let’s hope Princess Anne doesn’t pull a gown from the 1980′s out of her closet that has pouffy sleeves and ruffles!
By Arthur on April 11th, 2010 at 12:04 am
Exactly, Arthur!
By Evelyn on April 11th, 2010 at 12:10 am
Whatever you can say about Princess Royal, you must admit she is quite her own woman and sure of her tastes. And, who knows, by sticking with her old styles, she might actually catch up again with the fashion merry-g0-round. Retro, and all that.
By sojourner on April 11th, 2010 at 2:16 am
I don’t believe that the Princess Royal’s practice of wearing outfits she wore years ago has anything to do with her sense of security in her sartorial tastes. Rather, I believe that Princess Anne is now and has always been loathe to spend money. To my mind, her taste in clothes has always been deplorable, but that is neither here nor there.
By Gigi on April 11th, 2010 at 3:42 am
????????? ?????? ??????….
I have now received a reply from Headquarters Air […….
By Memphis Batt on April 11th, 2010 at 5:24 am
In all fairness to the Princess Royal, I have to admire her ability to wear the same outfits thirty years after they were originally worn. I know I can not fit into the suits I wore thirty years ago, unless they are sweat suits made from stretch material.
By Arthur on April 11th, 2010 at 5:31 am
That is a fanciful piece by Christopher Wilson in the Mail, imagining the Royal Wedding. It is no more newsworthy than any other recent rehash, but it sure makes one look forward instead of retreading the past.
But Duke and Duchess of… Connaught? It was a vaunted title once (Mr. Wilson may have cribbed it from the St. George’s Chapel website piece about Princess Margaret of Connaught marrying the Crown Prince of Sweden in 1905) but now isn’t it more associated with an upscale London hotel?
I prefer Duke and Duchess of Clarence and St. Andrews, which were William IV’s titles before he took the throne. (Sorry, I like all the associations of these titles.)
By Dan on April 12th, 2010 at 2:07 pm
Sorry, here’s the link:
http://tinyurl.com/y29kzzb
By Dan on April 12th, 2010 at 2:09 pm
Why does Kate wear Diana’s tiara? Doesn’t she wear one of the royal tiaras?
By Mikado-watcher on April 12th, 2010 at 3:40 pm
That photograph is one of Peter Phillips and Autumn Kelly at their wedding, with the faces of Prince William and Kate photo-shopped into the spaces. The tiara in the photo, therefore, is the one belonging to Princess Anne, the Princess Royal, which she lent to Autumn Kelly for the wedding. When Prince William and Kate marry, it may be that the Queen will lend her a tiara from the Royal jewelry in the Queen’s collection. I assume that Princess Diana’s entire jewelry collection was divided between Prince William and Prince Harry and not retained by Charles to piece out to Camilla. If either Prince William or Prince Harry are in possession of the jewelry belonging to Princess Diana, Kate may be lent a tiara that belonged to Princess Diana. I found that article to be rather snide, unhelpful and not in the least amusing. The Mail is an annoying publication and decidedly anti-Royal in my view.
By Gigi on April 12th, 2010 at 3:51 pm
The tiara in the picture is not like any I ever saw Diana wearing. I believe Diana was married wearing the Spencer family tiara. This wouldn’t make sense for Kate. William may prefer one of his mother’s tiaras as a way of remembering her at his wedding, although I would think something less prominent would be better. A bracelet or pendant, perhaps.
The Queen will provide the tiara, I hope.
By Dan on April 12th, 2010 at 4:07 pm
The Cambridge “Lover’s Knot” tiara is a possibility. It was given by the Queen to Diana, who wore it frequently, but it had been commissioned from Garrard by Queen Mary, who modeled it after one worn by her own Grandmother, Augusta of Hesse.
These are the proper associations, although again, acknowledging the tragedy of Diana so prominently on the head of the future Queen may cast a pall over the whole occasion.
By Dan on April 12th, 2010 at 4:25 pm
I would choose to see that as acknowleging the life, not the death of a beautiful person.
By Julie on April 12th, 2010 at 4:27 pm
But it was largely a tragic life, was it not? The all-too aptly named “Lover’s Knot” tiara (which frankly is also rather ostentatious) never rested atop a happy Diana. I should think it more of a jinx than a fitting memorial. A necklace would be more appropriate, nearer the heart, from where most of the world’s memories of Diana spring.
Goodness, I am on a jag this morning, aren’t I?
By Dan on April 12th, 2010 at 4:39 pm
Does anyone else find it suspicious that the legal advice about Charles’ ability to marry Camilla is being kept secret? I’m beginning to think that marriage may not be real after all.
By Lizzy on April 12th, 2010 at 4:58 pm
I would prefer to have the Queen loan Kate a tiara that has associations with women who were Queen consorts, without the connection to Diana. There are many other ways for Prince William to acknowledge and honor his mother in the ceremony. I agree that a necklace (and earrings) from Diana might be more appropriate than a tiara.
By Evelyn on April 12th, 2010 at 5:01 pm
I never believed that Charles’ “marriage” to Camilla was legal and I still believe that it is not. The fact that the legal advice is being kept secret seems to confirm that in my mind. The proof of the matter lies ahead of us, when Charles, upon the ever-to-be-lamented death of the Queen, is next in line to be Monarch. If Charles’ “marriage” is known to be illegal by those whose business it is to vouchsafe the legal and orderly succession to the throne, will those persons move to block his succession and coronation? The entire fabric of the British Monarchy may be tested or even come crashing down. I must wonder if the question of the legality of the marriage is the actual reason behind Charles’ rumored determination to change the Coronation Rite. I must wonder, further, if Charles’ true agenda involves his determination to remove the Coronation from the authority of those who know his marriage to be illegal, and therefore an insurmountable blockage to his ascension to the Throne of Great Britain. To all this intrigue, I recognize the only remedy to be the affirmation voiced by the subjects of the monarch during the Coronation Rite: “God save the Queen! God save the Queen! May the Queen live forever!”
By Gigi on April 12th, 2010 at 5:18 pm
I’m with Lizzy and Gigi on this one: I think the secrecy surrounding the legal advice on Charles’ marriage is highly suspect. Those who have nothing to hide normally don’t do so.
By Leslie on April 12th, 2010 at 5:27 pm
I agree wholeheartedly, as well. It would be best to have all come to light before the death of the Queen, so that– if necessary– Prince Charles could be removed from the line of succession ahead of time, with the crown going straight to Prince William.
By Evelyn on April 12th, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Did i miss something somewhere? What is this about C &C marriage being illegal?
By MikeH on April 12th, 2010 at 6:12 pm
Mike:
http://tinyurl.com/y4anj9d
By Leslie on April 12th, 2010 at 6:14 pm
I don’t think the legality of the Heir’s marriage has any impact on his accession to the throne. It would certainly impact upon Camilla’s legality to be crowned Charles’ Queen, which may be why they “plan” to give her the title of Princess Consort. On the other hand, if her marriage is illegal, she’s no Princess either, or Duchess for that matter.
However, no matter the moral implications (which, for his integrity as King, are grave indeed), whether or not his marriage is legal has no bearing on his right to the throne. The two are mutually exclusive.
By Dan on April 12th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
We do not know that they are mutually exclusive, Dan. That is why the legal advice was sought by Charles and his courtiers prior to his “marriage.” Charles sought a legal opinion because he feared that an illegal marriage would bar his accession to the throne. No one but legal experts can say whether Charles’ and his “marriage” have violated the statutes in the Royal Marriage Act and it’s addendum. If he has, and if he was advised that such was the case prior to his “marriage” to Camilla, then his right to succeed to the Throne is indeed in question and, in fact, in doubt. Further, I believe that Queen Elizabeth II feared or perhaps actually knew that the “marriage” was illegal and that is the real reason that she, as Monarch, felt she must absent herself from the civil service. No other reason, and certainly not the spurious one given at the time, could have prevented the Queen from the “wedding” of her firstborn son and heir, I my opinion. Perhaps Charles has gotten away with something, perhaps he has not. In any case, we have not heard the last of this matter. I believe that in the future we may be the unwilling and even aghast witnesses to the painful consequences of Charles’ absolute insistence upon having his own way. Nemesis falls even for imprudent Princes, as history provides ample precedents.
By Gigi on April 12th, 2010 at 7:13 pm
I don’t believe this story has legs. If the advice is to be held under the 30-year rule, Charles’s Kingship will be over by the time it’s released. Whatever the outcome, it will be just another dusty controversy for the historians to pore over.
The advice was undoubtedly split, with a few senior Church figures against, and most constitutional experts in favour. The Archbishop of Canterbury presided over the blessing at St. George’s, so which politician is going to argue over that? Certainly not the Tories, who will be in power for the next 10 years or more.
Another controversial front page for the Mail — but that’s all it is.
By John on April 12th, 2010 at 7:21 pm
John, do you recall what you told us in a much earlier post about the Archbishop of Canterbury? Your description was not a positive one and it certainly cast aspersions on the Archbishop’s character, politics, opinions and actions. The presiding at the blessing for Charles’ and Camilla’s service may well have been political expediency on the part of the Anglican Prelate. As for the legal advice being “undoubtedly” weighed in the favor of Charles’ by constitutional experts, no one knows if that is true. There is ample room for doubt. Further, I have no interest in whether a story has journalistic legs. The media has no credibility in my view. I am interested in the truth behind the question of whether Charles’ marriage was legal and upon what legal advice it was enjoined. We may never learn the truth about this, I am well aware. The question of the legality of the marriage, however, remains in the minds of some. List me as one who did not drink the Kool Aide.
By Gigi on April 12th, 2010 at 7:36 pm
Gigi, legitimacy is always based on practical expediency. We were promised a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty (EU Constitution). Both Blair and Brown blithely ignored their manifesto promises and signed it anyway, whipping it through Parliament. It’s now a fact of our lives despite 70% of the country opposing it.
The Archbishop is still the Archbishop and the advice is under lock and key. Power has its own interpretation of morality.
Go figure.
By John on April 12th, 2010 at 7:42 pm
I agree with you, John. Now that it’s done, to argue that the marriage was and is illegal is to say that Queen and Court are complicit in it. HM may not have attended the service, but she would have had to stop the alleged illegal act in order not to be a party to it. Charles did not act in a vacuum. Are we to lay this claim of Royal malfeasance against the Queen? She clearly does not consider her son’s marriage illegal or a threat to the Monarchy.
What’s done is done. Besides, all sorts of records are kept secret for extended periods of time. I don’t see anything ominous in this particular case.
By Dan on April 12th, 2010 at 7:42 pm
Dan, the Queen did attend the St. George’s Blessing afterwards, so, as you say, was complicit in the match. Game, set and marriage.
By John on April 12th, 2010 at 7:45 pm
No one knows what the Queen thinks about anything, least of all Charles and his second “marriage.” Queen Elizabeth II is the most discreet person ever to grace the throne of Great Britain. I doubt if anyone but the Duke of Edinburgh really knows what the Queen knows about Charles’ second “wedding” or when she knew it. The entire situation was a lose-lose proposition for all concerned, except Charles, Camilla, and Camilla’s two children who were gifted with one million pounds sterling each by Charles in advance of the “wedding.” Charles is so stubborn that no one could have turned him from his determined course, not even the Queen. Insofar as was possible, the Queen appears to have distanced herself from the ceremony. There has to be a reason–a good one–and in the fullness of time, the truth may come to light. Let us wait and see.
By Gigi on April 12th, 2010 at 8:35 pm
I agree with you in principle, Gigi but let’s face it, realistically nothing can be done. Whether we like it or not, they are married and she’s going to be his consort when he becomes king. There’s nothing that can be done about it now, and frankly I think it’s best put in the past and accept things as they are. At any rate, if the Queen lives as long as her mother did, Charles’ reign will not be long.
But I have to say, I had never heard of the Prince’s gifts to Camilla’s children; I find that a bit shocking.
By NCKat on April 12th, 2010 at 10:58 pm
Yeah– kind of like the sugar-daddy giving a bribe to the stepchildren. I also hadn’t heard of it until now.
By Evelyn on April 12th, 2010 at 11:57 pm
Exactly – I find it outdated and repulsive. Were they bribes or “marriage settlements?” Charles should have paid Camilla’s ex-husband in compensation for losing his wife if we are to extend that logic. Don’t laugh – “Alienation of affection” laws are still on the books in several states here in the US.
By NCKat on April 13th, 2010 at 12:06 am
We forget that Prince Charles, the Duchess of Cornwall and her ex-spouse where all children of the sixties. My parents always claimed that all three explicitly agreed and where perfectly pleased with the arrangements (or shennanigans, depending on your point of view). Princess Diana may have been in the dark, but for how long? Indeed, we do know that once the PC and DC’s affair became known, Parker-Bowles quickly divorced and remarried his second, and just recently deceased, wife. My parents always claimed she was, at the time of the marriage, already a “long time companion.”
By sojourner on April 13th, 2010 at 1:36 am
Like everyone else, Prince Charles is entitled to do what he wants with his own money. A gift to his new children-in-law is a way of cementing his relationship with them, especially as they are now bringing up their own families, and Camilla is not a rich woman.
I don’t see why anyone would complain about it.
By John on April 13th, 2010 at 11:45 am
It’s the timing, John. If he did it before the marriage, it looks a tad tacky; if after, it doesn’t look bad.
By NCKat on April 13th, 2010 at 11:48 am
Also, the children are grown and have careers of their own and their father, while not wealthy on Charles’ scale, could help them out. It’s not Charles’ place to do so unless Camilla asked him.
By NCKat on April 13th, 2010 at 11:50 am
She would certainly have agreed.
And Brigadier Parker Bowles is only a retired soldier. He’s not wealthy enough to allow his children to keep up with the social set around the Prince of Wales. Charles was probably just being tactful in quietly acknowledging that.
By John on April 13th, 2010 at 11:54 am
wow! have been offline for a bit and looks like i have lots to catch up on…in regards to the legality of charles and camilla’s wedding – doesnt the queen have to give her consent for all royal weddings? also, if there was a question of legalities i cant imagine the queen would allow the marriage to go forward and compromise the throne.
in regards to charles’s cash gift to camilla and her children it is his own business…isnt charles camilla’s son’s godfather…
thoughts
By coni on April 13th, 2010 at 3:44 pm
I reckon that any challenge to Charles and Camilla’s marriage would result in a finding of unconstitutionality of the law they would be accused of having broke. Like the ban against Royals marrying Roman Catholics, as soon as someone challenges it in court (as Peter Phillips might have, if Autumn Kelly had not given up the faith), such laws will be found to be discriminatory and will be tossed out.
In the modern conception of equality under law (or human rights, whatever you care to call it), you can’t discriminate based on creed any more than you can on race or color.
The days of the British Sovereign being Supreme Governor of the Church of England are numbered anyway, in my opinion. The Sovereign doesn’t even select the Archbishop of Canterbury. So what’s the point? It’s a ceremonial position that has no relevance to the modern world.
By Dan on April 13th, 2010 at 3:47 pm
…Or the modern Church, for that matter.
By Dan on April 13th, 2010 at 3:58 pm
Well, in Britain the law is still the Queen’s Law, so the current Acts that decide these things stand whatever happens.
By John on April 13th, 2010 at 4:30 pm
This from the Government’s report on the subject (sorry if it reads jibberishy:)
“The Government are satisfied that it is lawful for the Prince of Wales and Mrs Parker Bowles, like anyone else, to marry by a civil ceremony in accordance with Part III of the Marriage Act 1949. ¶ Civil marriages were introduced in England, by the Marriage Act 1836. Section 45 said that the Act . . . shall not extend to the marriage of any of the Royal Family”. ¶ But the provisions on civil marriage in the 1836 Act were repealed by the Marriage Act 1949. All remaining parts of the 1836 Act, including Section 45, were repealed by the Registration Service Act 1953. No part of the 1836 Act therefore remains on the statute book.”
By Dan on April 13th, 2010 at 4:46 pm
Thanks for that info, Dan. You are quite resourceful!
By Evelyn on April 13th, 2010 at 5:05 pm
Hmmm… does anyone think/know if Charles would have to choose between Camilla and the throne? Let’s say, hypothetically speaking, he had to choose. He doesn’t seem the type to go ahead and be a lonely bachelor for the rest of his life. And he has been waiting a long time to be King. Does he have to come out now and formally say he has abdicated his position or wait until the time comes? Would the Queen go over his head and put William in place, believing Charles would not be a good King, or does she not have that authority?
Just wondering.
By Meg on April 13th, 2010 at 5:45 pm
If the government maintains that there is no longer a prohibition against a Royal entering into a civil marriage (in other words, that the marriage was and is legal), then there is no basis for Charles to choose between his wife and the throne. I suppose a change in the government’s position could lead to a legal challenge of the original ruling, but to what end? As John and I have argued, the deed is done. Who has an interest in arguing against it, and on what basis? Because certain people don’t like him? Poor regard hardly gives one legal standing or an iron-clad case to justify taking him and the Queen’s government to court.
As regards the “secrets” being kept until Charles’s death, keep in mind that the government’s ruling of legality is public knowledge (I’ve quoted the gist of it above). It is only the deliberations that led to the ruling that are kept confidential in the meantime.
By Dan on April 13th, 2010 at 6:42 pm
Here’s a Guardian article from 2005, for what it’s worth. As I have said, a challenge could be made or a bill issued that would clarify the matter, but why bother now?
http://tinyurl.com/y3f2xag
OK, I’ll get off my soapbox now.
By Dan on April 13th, 2010 at 6:54 pm
Prince William has been posted to RAF Anglesey in North Wales for his three years of service in SARF. His other choice (he was allowed two) was Lossiemouth, in Scotland. The Prince will be able to continue to live in a cottage nearby that he has been renting.
This posting will mean regular service in Northern Ireland, as well as stronger connections with Wales.
The article in the Telegraph notes that he will complete his training in September. Don’t I remember hearing somewhere that the posting begins in January? That would leave ample time for a fall wedding. It would be good if Kate could join him full-time in Wales.
By Evelyn on April 15th, 2010 at 1:06 pm
True, Evelyn, but Anglesey is a long way from London and Berkshire. And a SAR pilot can be called out at any time. There won’t be much space for serious soicializing.
By John on April 15th, 2010 at 1:09 pm
PS: Anglesey is not noted for much except sea and sheep. There are few watering holes and little night life. I can’t see Kate relishing a life on Anglesey where most of the population speak Welsh.
By John on April 15th, 2010 at 1:11 pm
Maybe it would be a good opportunity for both of them to learn a little Welsh. One day they will be Prince & Princess of Wales.
Given that Kate hasn’t been seen enjoying nightlife much lately, I don’t expect the rural nature of Anglesey will be of major concern to her.
By Evelyn on April 15th, 2010 at 1:22 pm
John, what does “a long way from London and Berkshire” mean? Perhaps a 5 1/2-hour drive? A 40-minute flight? How long on the train?
That’s not what many people in larger countries would call a hardship, and certainly doable at the weekend, whether she spends the week in Berkshire or Anglesey. But we Americans, for example, are accustomed to more square mileage. (At 28, how close must Kate remain to mom and dad, and for how many days at a time? In the years before my mother passed I saw her twice a year. Perhaps we Americans are more accustomed to moving away from home than others?)
The idea that William being “on call” precludes a happy marriage is simply odd. All working married couples spend an average of 8-10 hours apart every day! Instead of being at the office, he’ll be in a helicopter. What’s the difference, besides the added danger? How is it different from being a fireman? Do British firemen not marry because they are “on call?”
Kate seems to have adapted nicely to being a homebody and Wales is a smart place for her and the Prince to spend some time (and I’m sure she’ll find at least a few people who speak English near a Welsh military base!)
Anglesey makes perfect sense to me.
By Dan on April 15th, 2010 at 2:50 pm
Dan, North and Mid-Wales are rural, hill country with rotten roads and an almost unusable railway that goes nowhere. I know I lived there for a while.
Anglesey is an island with an old road bridge to the mainland. To travel there from the London area is a nightmare. To live there is like being in prison, especially at any time other than high summer, when it’s overrun by tourists and hill climbers.
Trust me, Kate will not be going to live there.
By John on April 15th, 2010 at 3:08 pm
Sounds like a contradiction in terms:
“…rotten roads…unusable railway…a nightmare…like being in prison….”
Yet “overrun by tourists”!
John has placed his bet. We’ll see what happens.
By Dan on April 15th, 2010 at 3:19 pm
It sounds like a great place for PW&K to spend the first years of married life. The isolation, remoteness, and poor roads will reduce the number of photographers and journalists watching their every movement. It sounds like the kind of place where Prince William might have an opportunity to get to know people personally, so those people will know him as a PERSON and not just as a Royal.
Given the remoteness, when PW does have time off, no one should speak against PW&K’s desire to spend time in London, or wherever.
By Evelyn on April 15th, 2010 at 3:20 pm
Seeing and experiencing first-hand the hardships of those who live in remote locations in the UK also will help both PW&K grow in compassion for common folk. Lots of good lessons to learn by living there for a few years.
By Evelyn on April 15th, 2010 at 3:23 pm
Google “Anglesey, UK” and check out what you find. The entire coastline has been designated an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. I’d be in heaven, but I prefer the rugged out-of-the-way and love being on the water.
Across the strait lies Caernarfon Castle, where PC was invested Prince of Wales in 1969.
By Dan on April 15th, 2010 at 4:17 pm
And the Snowdonia mountain range just across the strait, which is why it’s “overrun by tourists” of an adventurist type.
By John on April 15th, 2010 at 4:27 pm
Could be their Balmoral.
By Dan on April 15th, 2010 at 4:35 pm
If Kate has an interest in nature photography, Anglesey could be a wonderful place to explore. I expect a coffee-table book of photos from their time in North Wales would sell well. (Profits to any one of Prince William’s charities, of course.)
By Evelyn on April 15th, 2010 at 4:54 pm
He also chose Lossiemouth in Scotland as one of his two choices. Can you imagine metropolitan Kate wanting to live there?
By John on April 15th, 2010 at 5:07 pm
John, I think you may need to expand your view of Kate. She went to St Andrews. She now lives in a non-metro area. She seems to enjoy time at Balmoral.
I spent about 10 years of my adult life living in a city, quite happily, having grown up in a medium-size town. I now thoroughly love living in the country.
Kate may not see a few years in the Welsh seaside as a prison sentence. She may see it as a great escape from other options, and a good place to focus on beginning a strong marriage.
By Evelyn on April 15th, 2010 at 6:10 pm
Of course, I believe the news stories that say PW&K consider themselves engaged. If so, he wouldn’t have made the decision about what base to request without discussing it with Kate. Give them some credit.
By Evelyn on April 15th, 2010 at 6:12 pm
Kate may prefer city life but as a princess she shouldn’t be seen club hoping with other RAF wives while their husbands are on call. I guess living in an isolated location is no problem for her. Besides, she can practice karaoke or yodeling if she likes.
By Mikado-watcher on April 15th, 2010 at 6:15 pm
I’m in agreement with Evelyn and Dan and the rest – I believe William and Kate have an understanding and consider themselves engaged, and I believe his two choices were made in conjunction with Kate. To spend her first few years of life in the fishbowl under those conditions would be ideal – out of the way, lots of time together (other than when he’s at work), greatly reduced scrutiny than would happen elsewhere. Sounds like newlywed heaven to me.
By Leslie on April 15th, 2010 at 6:25 pm
Well said, Leslie! I agree with you, Dan and Evelyn. It sounds like a great adventure to me and not unlike the period of time after their wedding that Princess Elizabeth (as she was then) and Prince Philip (the Duke of Edinburgh) spent in Malta where Prince Philip was a serving Naval Officer in the service of the King. It has been said that the period of time the Prince and Princess spent in Malta is remembered by them as among the happiest times of their marriage. They mixed with ordinary persons, lived lives as normal as could be had under the circumstances and were unfettered by protocol. Lovely!
By Gigi on April 15th, 2010 at 9:18 pm
Considering that William loathes the press and that he treasures his privacy, this might be the ideal beginning for their marriage. We shall see!
By NCKat on April 15th, 2010 at 9:39 pm
I seem to recall Sarah Ferguson, as the newly married Duchess of York, was not allowed to accompany her husband, Prince Andrew, and live with him as a Navy wife the way Princess Elizabeth and Prince Philip had in Malta. Sarah was given an apartment in Buckingham Palace, where she lived alone, and became a working member of “The Firm” in her husband’s absence. In later years, Sarah said those early days were very difficult for her as a newlywed and contributed, in some way, to the eventual breakdown of her marriage to Prince Andrew. Do we dare to hope that Buckingham Palace has learned a lesson from Sarah and Prince Andrew and will allow Kate to start off her married life as a military wife with Prince William, or will Kate be locked away in an ivory tower, i.e. Buckingham Palace, working as a Royal during the week and seeing her husband only at the weekend?
By Arthur on April 15th, 2010 at 10:01 pm
Good point, Arthur. Let us hope that the Palace has, indeed, learned a lesson. However, because of the vital importance of this matter, let us also PRAY that Kate and Prince William will be allowed to spend their time together and not be sequestered as Prince Andrew and Sarah, Duchess of York, were. That, obviously, was a dreadful mistake for which Prince Andrew, Sarah, Duchess of York, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie have paid dearly.
By Gigi on April 15th, 2010 at 10:14 pm
I’m impressed by the way Andrew and Sarah have remained good friends throughout the years. It seems they’ve made the best of things and their daughters are the better for it. If only every divorced couple with children could follow suit!
By NCKat on April 15th, 2010 at 10:18 pm
Anglesey is beautiful. Anglesey is private. Anglesey offers security. Sounds to me like a lovely way to start a marriage that will be largely in the limelight.
Of course, if PW and KM, Anglesey might never be the same…
By sojourner on April 15th, 2010 at 10:21 pm
oops, I meant : if PW and KM move there, Anglesey might never be the same
By sojourner on April 15th, 2010 at 10:22 pm
I have to say this but I think you’re all being very optimistic — not a bad thing — but answer this, why was one of William’s choices Lossiemouth in the far north of Scotland, a place so remote even the seagulls struggle to find it.
As for the weather, they’ve just come through an unparalleled Arctic winter. Do you really think Kate is going to spend the first three years of her married life there?
That way madness lies.
By John on April 16th, 2010 at 11:05 am
John, Are you saying it was William, not RAF, who hand picked these two possible remote locations where Kate doesn’t want to live?
By Mikado-watcher on April 16th, 2010 at 1:38 pm
Yes, Mikado, it was, and he chose the two remotest of them. I wonder why?
By John on April 16th, 2010 at 1:42 pm
If ” because William wants to stay away from Kate desperately” is the answer you are looking for John, here is my question “Why has William been to ski resort with the Middletons?”
By Mikado-watcher on April 16th, 2010 at 1:54 pm
John, I’m puzzled by your lambasting of these remote corners of your country. You are clearly a city boy at heart, but haven’t Royals throughout history bolted themselves in out-of-the-way places?
I understand there are remote places in Scotland that generations of Royals have shown a fancy for.
Balmoral?
Birkhall?
Castle of Mey?
I think you’re just toying with us optimists.
William’s choices were spot on, in keeping with the nature of his family’s favorite retreats.
By Dan on April 16th, 2010 at 3:12 pm
I agree with Dan and Mikado-watcher. John, the Royal Family, with the exceptions of Princess Diana and Princess Margaret, simply adore cold, wet, climates and rugged terrain. The Castle of Mey, which the Queen Mother purchased not long after the death of King George VI and her daughter’s Coronation, is a property which is extraordinarily remote and yet, each year until the Queen Mother’s death, she spent joyous weeks there while the Queen and the rest of the family were at Balmoral, also a very remote spot. It does not surprise me in the least that Prince William selected equally remote locations for his next posting. I believe that you are assuming facts not in evidence by concluding that Prince William chose those locations to preclude Kate wishing to be with him there. If, as you seem to believe, Prince William is attempting to detach himself from Kate in a manner that will attach to her the blame for the collapse of the relationship, he would hardly be going on vacation trips with her, as he continues to do. Kate loved Balmoral when she visited there, she is an outdoor enthusiast, is an athletic, active person and adores skiing in the ice and snow. All those qualities contribute to my belief that Kate will thrive in any climate, any part of the Kingdom, regardless of the barren, remote nature of the area. Surely Prince William, who knows Kate better than any of us possibly can, is wholly aware of her abilities and her can-do attitude.
By Gigi on April 16th, 2010 at 4:05 pm
I’d give anything for a cottage on the remote Welsh or Scottish coast, but I am no “metropolitan Kate,” as John has dubbed her.
I much prefer the sound of water crashing on rocks to the noise of traffic (and people!) on city streets. I have not visited Wales but I’ve been to a few remote spots on the coasts of England and Scotland, and found it breathtaking and, indeed, more energizing than the hustle and bustle of urban living.
William and Kate will have their fill of the public once they embrace their fate. No wonder they prefer to wait!
Hey, I’m a poet and didn’t… realize.
By Dan on April 16th, 2010 at 4:45 pm
True, when there’s a castle and an infrastructure built around history there, but Anglesey and Lossiemouth have nothing but mountains and sheep. There are no servants, or any form of society at all. Kate would be mortified.
I do know what I’m talking about. I’ve been to most of these places.
And, Dan, I live in a very civilized rural area;
By John on April 16th, 2010 at 4:49 pm
I’m sure very small number of servants and security officers will be coming along where PW and KM go. Anglesey and Lossiemouth aren’t the places for you John, but who knows how Kate feels about the locations? Having sheep as only neighbor isn’t so exciting but they very discreet and certainly pleasant to be around than paparazzi, IMO.
By Mikado-watcher on April 16th, 2010 at 5:18 pm
I think the town of Holyhead, six miles from William’s new post, sounds just the ticket for young marrieds.
A defunct aluminum smelter on the outskirts, a soon-to-be shuttered nuclear plant nearby, the longest breakwater in Europe (for those romantic strolls), and one of the first churches in the recently-founded Jedi religion, based on you-know-what.
Spa living! With all that going on, quiet evenings at home will be a rare respite.
By Dan on April 16th, 2010 at 6:33 pm
I agree, Mikado-watcher. None of us can know what Kate would prefer, but of all of us, Prince William would know in what type of surroundings Kate would be willing to live. Kate does not appear to me to be a prima donna, nor extremely high maintenance. I would not be surprised to learn that Prince William discussed his posting location options with Kate prior to making his selections, as my husband did with me when he was in the military service. No doubt they caucused and agreed about the locations, as sensible, intelligent couples do. Kate was not born into a Royal or a noble family, surrounded by pomp and splendor, waited on hand and foot by servants. I think it is inaccurate and not at all useful to ascribe to her attitudes and behavior which we have seen no evidence that she possesses. My dear John, until now I did not perceive how biased you are against Kate and how determined you are that she should not marry Prince William. It is your right to espouse those opinions, of course, but I hope you will also agree that it is my right to espouse the opposite opinion. Further, none of us have any portfolio in this matter. Prince William and Kate alone will make their decisions on the direction of their future course and their life choices. That is as it should be.
By Gigi on April 16th, 2010 at 6:40 pm
The main thoroughfare along the sea in Holyhead, Anglesey, is called… Prince of Wales Road.
It’s FATE!
By Dan on April 16th, 2010 at 7:16 pm
Dan, you’re on a roll! Have you found them a house yet?
By Leslie on April 16th, 2010 at 7:18 pm
Are you kidding? I’m already under the sideboard.
*Hic*
By Dan on April 16th, 2010 at 8:05 pm
LOL!!! Leslie and Dan you’re entertaining me this spring afternoon! Actually, you all are, my RA friends! Thanks
By Julie on April 16th, 2010 at 8:08 pm
Then budge over and pass the flask, Dan! We haven’t been on a scouting mission together since the White House dinner!
By Leslie on April 16th, 2010 at 8:10 pm
You do know you wouldn’t have half so much fun if you lived in Anglesey or Lossiemouth.
By John on April 16th, 2010 at 8:12 pm
Oh, dear! How is it possible, please tell me, that Dan has already imbibed too liberally from the liquor cabinet in the sideboard? Is anyone able to go to Dan and coax him to drink quantities of hot black coffee sufficient to restore his sobriety and to eradicate his hiccups? While we are at it, is anyone available to join Dan under the sideboard to assist in the covert operations of information gathering? (We must be practical, at all costs.) I am not a superstitious woman, but the fact that the main thoroughfare along the sea in Holyhead, Anglesey is named Prince of Wales Road does, indeed, seem propitious! The planets have aligned and the stars are arrayed as ordained by Nature in a pattern necessary for this Royal Romance to succeed. May they shine for our Golden Prince William and his lovely Kate!
By Gigi on April 16th, 2010 at 8:14 pm
My dear John, here at RA we can have fun in any surrounding, surely you must realize that!
By Gigi on April 16th, 2010 at 8:24 pm
No fun in Anglesey? Pishaw! Just look at all there is to see…
http://www.holyhead.org/photos.html
And not to be missed: the burial chambers at Barcloddiad Yr Gawres.
Truly heaven on earth!
By Dan on April 16th, 2010 at 8:34 pm
Just as I remember it, Dan. I rest my case.
Kate, if you’re reading this — be warned. The only interesting people there are the Druids.
Oh, I forgot, the Romans massacred the last of them 2000 years ago.
By John on April 16th, 2010 at 8:39 pm
HM and TRHs the Duke, Prince Charles, and Princess Anne all visited Holyhead on 9th August 1958. See the stone marker in the photos at my previous link.
I’ve never heard one of them say that the visit was anything but perfectly delightful. I’m sure Charles has regaled William with all his fond memories, and that’s why William chose it as the first home for himself and his bride.
Oh, Holyhead!
By Dan on April 16th, 2010 at 8:47 pm
My dear John…there will always be Druids. Men may pass away, but their beliefs live on long after they are gone.
Let us remember how and why the Roman Empire fell and that it was Queen Boudicca who destroyed a storied Roman Legion in Britain so many years ago.
By Gigi on April 16th, 2010 at 8:50 pm
The Prince of Wales Hotel and Pub.
In Holyhead!
http://www.holyhead.com/pubs/page2.html
Divine!
By Dan on April 16th, 2010 at 9:07 pm
I know that little more than five years ago, I myself, of roughly KM and PW age, decided to take off and find my own little corner of lost Europe. I wandered about for a bit, here and there, and thought I had found it. Well, within about six months, so had about 20 0ther fellow twenty-somethings! While at first I groused about “newcomers” (did I say the locals showed inmense foreberance?
) pretty soon I realized it was the absolute of best worlds. I stayed for about 2 years, then came back to my regular life, but part always stayed with me (in the form of my hubby, another fellow wanderer).
While Anglesey might not be for everyone, it certainly holds its charms. And they become all the more vivid when one considers they are only temporary.
By sojourner on April 16th, 2010 at 11:05 pm
I LOVE that Prince of Wales Pub!! Perfect!!!
By Gigi on April 17th, 2010 at 12:08 am
It would be so nice if Prince William would make his engagement official soon.
And a fall wedding. 
And a short honeymoon (due to the economy) followed by three years on Anglesey. 
Does Prince William enjoy sailing? I noticed all those sailboats in the photos Dan provided. Maybe PW will teach Kate to sail. 
By Evelyn on April 17th, 2010 at 12:38 am
I saw photos of Holyhead. It is lovely place quiet and very relaxed. Not bad at all.
By Mikado-watcher on April 17th, 2010 at 12:57 am
Sorry John, we are all quite charmed by William and Kate’s future love nest in ye olde Holyhead, ANGLESEY!!
(The island could use the boost. I suspect our young couple recognized that. Kate will be the Belle of the ball there!)
By Dan on April 18th, 2010 at 2:29 am
Well if June goes by without an announcement and PW makes his way to his base camp, what will Kate Middleton do? Is it going to be another long trip on the weekends? Would she be allowed to move up there with him without a formal engagement? Or is this PW’s chance to get away from her? I am one who believes they are unofficially engaged, as I’ve stated before, but from the sounds of it, this place is really out there and she seems the dress and heels kind of girl, not a northern winter lass (though she’s shown us she can make mud boots and a shotgun or heavy coat and ski boots look stylish).
I don’t know. As much as I believe they have an understanding, something about this is just not right at the moment. My gut tells me there is a very different undercurrent than we all realize right now. I don’t think I want to think about this until we see what he does this summer. Seems like a really sudden and fast paced summer if indeed they are going to be engaged and married. I mean being engaged and then moving is hard enough, but to be engaged, married, moving, and William starting his job seems like a lot for anyone. Shouldn’t he be more settled into his role first?
By Meg on April 18th, 2010 at 3:57 am
Wait… could they be married in Anglesey since they would eventually become Prince and Princess of Wales? Or must it be somewhere in Britain? I know a lot of military men and women marry on base out here in the US.
By Meg on April 18th, 2010 at 4:03 am
Anglesey is in Britain so I’m sure they could legally be married there, but it’s not practical, because when a future king gets married, there’s all the publicity that goes with it to present the bride to the public. I’m sure William would like nothing better than an elopement but I’m also sure that tradition and protocol demands marriage in London.
By NCKat on April 18th, 2010 at 11:20 am
We’ve also discussed marriage in Windsor, which isn’t far outside London and has Royal precedent.
Meg, it does seem like there may not be enough time between an early summer engagement and a fall wedding. But I think that Prince William will give serious consideration to a non-summer wedding, again to distance their wedding from the memory of his parents’ wedding (and Prince Andrew’s wedding).
Prince William is at RAF Valley in Anglesey now, and will not need to move there, though he may bring some more of his stuff, now that he knows he will be stationed there. Remember, too, that he has staff, and access to more staff, to help with such matters.
Since Prince William has arranged for private accommodation (renting a cottage or farm house, I hear), I would guess that Kate could move there (at least unofficially) at any time. Given that Prince Edward & Sophie lived together at Buckingham Palace before they were engaged, there would be precedent for it. But, if it’s unofficial, we may not be sure about whether Kate’s just visiting or has actually moved in.
By Evelyn on April 18th, 2010 at 12:06 pm
I hope none of our European RA colleagues are suffering from the onslaught of the ash clouds. Be safe and well everyone and let us know how you are doing!
By Gigi on April 18th, 2010 at 7:23 pm
Ah, thank you NCKat and Evelyn. Makes sense.
And I’m with Gigi. Hope you are all well! But as a great admirer of England and an English wannabe, I would love to be stuck over there right now.
By Meg on April 18th, 2010 at 9:26 pm
“Oh, to be in England, now that April’s here…”
I confess I also long for the beautiful people and places of England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales. I comfort myself by reading books and looking at photographs of British scenes, British history and the Monarchy.
By Gigi on April 18th, 2010 at 10:18 pm
I neglected to cite the author of that sublime quotation but I am certain everyone knows it is the magnificent Robert Browning. Now I shall resume watching the wonderful movie “The Importance of Being Earnest.”
By Gigi on April 18th, 2010 at 10:23 pm
Thank you, Gigi. The main problem is that people are stranded in odd places around Europe and can’t get home. The UK and much of Europe is now a no-fly zone.
My former business partner is stuck in Portugal. Still, if you’re going to be stranded anywhere, Portugal or southern Spain is the long straw, I would think.
By John on April 19th, 2010 at 9:35 am
Evelyn, for a weekend, perhaps, but what would she do all day if she lived in a cottage on the edge of Snowdon? Climb mountains?
I can’t see her going into Bangor for a knees-up, although there is a university there. If all this speculation is true, I do hope she likes sheep.
By John on April 19th, 2010 at 9:39 am
Well for goodness sakes, John, why would Kate not like sheep? I adore sheep, especially woolly little lambs. I am beginning to suspect that you are taking an unnecessarily gloomy view of this matter, which, from my point of view is ba-a-a-a(d.)
(Sorry, I had to throw in a sheep imitation.) 
Let us not forget that Kate is an intelligent young lady with many inner resources upon which to draw. Further, the area Dan describes sounds ideal for hiking and the clean, clear, cold air will be a tonic after the polluted air of London. Let us also recall that she will be in closer proximity to the man she loves, which I am certain is her primary concern. I believe that it is unfair to misjudge Kate by ascribing to her traits that are not hers. Kate is not a vapid social butterfly whose only thought is what to wear to the next party. Rather, she is a cultured, intelligent and educated young woman who has been well-brought up and behaves accordingly.
By Gigi on April 19th, 2010 at 3:36 pm
Very good, Gigi. I’m sure you don’t mean it. Kate is a metropolitan girl who would be totally miserable in the wilds of Wales, having to say Yaki da all day to Welsh-speaking locals and their sheep.
I recommend that she find herself a handsome Duke’s scion, like her sister Pippa, and settle down among all his … er … sheep.
By John on April 19th, 2010 at 4:00 pm
Some less-than-reliable internet sources are saying that William is likely to decline an invitation to attend the upcoming Swedish Royal Wedding because of the speculation about his own marriage plans that would intensify were he to attend such an event. (The story says that the Swedes are more “relaxed” about protocol, which would allow Kate to attend with him.)
It says Charles is likely to accept the invitation when it arrives at Buckingham Palace at the end of this month.
By Dan on April 19th, 2010 at 4:54 pm
Actually, Dan, either Prince William or Charles would be very appropriate representatives for the Queen at the wedding of Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden. Of course the greatest honor to the Swedish throne and married couple would be if the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh would attend, but since that is unlikely, the next greatest honor would be for Charles to attend. The third greatest honor–a signal that the Swedish Royal Family is, indeed, held in high esteem by the House of Windsor–would be the attendance of Prince William. The Swedish Royal Family and the British Royal Family are related by blood through the former Queen Louise of Sweden, who was sister to Lord Mountbatten of Burma. Lord Mountbatten of Burma, besides being Prince Philip’s uncle, was also Queen Victoria’s direct descendant–one of her Great Grandsons.
My dear John, to your most recent post I shall respond by quoting a message sent ship-to-shore, in jest, between Princess Elizabeth and her husband, Prince Philip, many years ago in Malta, viz.–”What is this bleating of the sheep??”
I have been waiting to quote that one for years! 
By Gigi on April 19th, 2010 at 6:07 pm
It does make sense that the first in line to the British throne attends the wedding of the first in line to the Swedish throne, although William is much closer in age and his and her reigns are likely to coincide for a much longer period. Charles and Camilla could be her parents. Who wants so many parents at their wedding?
By Dan on April 19th, 2010 at 6:52 pm
It is the Mad Tea Party “Alice in Wonderland” logic of Royal Protocol which is the controlling factor here, Dan. But I certainly understand your point. Nevertheless, trust me when I say that the Swedish Royal Family–to a person–would much rather have the incredible social cache of having the most highly esteemed person in Europe, and arguably the world, the Queen of England and her Consort, Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, attend the wedding than anyone else!
By Gigi on April 19th, 2010 at 7:34 pm
In time, it also will be interesting to see who from the other Royal Families (in Europe and elsewhere) attend Prince William’s (& Kate’s) nuptials!
By Evelyn on April 19th, 2010 at 7:42 pm
When was the last state visit between Britain and Sweden? I can’t recall any.
By Dan on April 19th, 2010 at 8:04 pm
Interesting question, Dan. I’ve consulted Wikipedia, which you may or may not consider a reliable source.
Queen Elizabeth II had state visits in Sweden on both June 8, 1956, and May 25, 1983. During the second visit, Crown Princess Victoria would have been two months shy of 6 years old.
King Carl XVI Gustaf had a state visit in the UK on July 7-10, 1975.
The King & Queen of Sweden were among the guests at Charles & Diana’s wedding.
By Evelyn on April 19th, 2010 at 9:05 pm
I am not sure that the Scandinavian countries have State Visits in the UK, perhaps in part because they are not recognized power players in world affairs. The Swedish Royal Family has been well-represented in the UK at Royal weddings, Royal funerals, the various Jubilee Celebrations of the reigning monarchs, and so on. The nations who are chosen to pay State Visits are selected, I believe, by the Prime Minister and his/her government officials, not by the reigning monarch, although I assume the King or Queen would have something to say about it. State Visits are about improving relations with a country or confirming relations with a country whose goodwill is important to the host country. It is doubtful that anything will cause Norway, Sweden or Denmark to have anything but goodwill for Great Britain. As I mentioned earlier, the former Queen of Sweden was a relative of Prince Philip’s; the former Queen Maud of Norway was a daughter of Great Britain’s King Edward VII, and the Royal family of Denmark has blood connections to the House of Windsor because Prince Philip’s family were originally Danes prior to his relative being asked to accept the Crown of Greece. It’s all in the family and quite cordial. Interestingly, being a blood relative did not keep Kaiser Wilhelm from becoming an enemy of England during WWI. He was the eldest son of Victoria, Princess Royal, the oldest daughter of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert, the Prince Consort. Evidently filial devotion was a dead key on his personal piano.
By Gigi on April 19th, 2010 at 9:11 pm
The King and Queen of Norway came for a State Visit in just the past couple of years, didn’t they?
HM had a State Visit to Norway in 2001.
By Dan on April 19th, 2010 at 9:56 pm
No, while King Harald and Queen Sonja visited Britain recently, it was not an official State Visit.
By Dan on April 19th, 2010 at 9:59 pm
Consulting Wikipedia, King Harald & Queen Sonja were in the UK for an official state visit July 6-9, 1994.
By Evelyn on April 19th, 2010 at 10:31 pm
The media is reporting that 40,000 Americans are stranded in Great Britain. That is a far larger number than I had imagined. Despite the poor economy in the USA, Americans simply cannot resist the lure of visiting that beautiful Island Kingdom.
By Gigi on April 19th, 2010 at 11:11 pm
Gigi, I would expect that a fair number of the 40,000 were in the UK for work reasons. But I do agree with you– it’s a wonderful place to visit. I thoroughly enjoyed my time there one May… almost 28 years ago.
By Evelyn on April 20th, 2010 at 1:23 am
Finally I found something I was looking for on the Monarchy website! (message to Courtiers: I prefer the old website
)
King Harald and Queen Sonja of Norway made an Official Visit (not a State visit, which is different) on 25-27 October 2005.
By Dan on April 20th, 2010 at 1:53 pm
Good grief. Now OK! Magazine is jumping on board with a cheesy article about William and Kate’s imagined wedding, complete with it’s own (poorly) doctored image.
http://tinyurl.com/y6ykvpb
OK! should change it’s name to ENOUGH ALREADY!
By Dan on April 20th, 2010 at 7:16 pm
Why are all these wedding articles surfacing suddenly? Either they are desperate to increase sales (almost surely the issue) or they know something no one else knows (highly unlikely.) Can’t these people think of anything or anyone else to feature in an article? Manufactured news is hardly unheard of but this is simply absurd.
By Gigi on April 20th, 2010 at 7:28 pm
Nice punt, Dan, but that’s all these things are. The real question is will Kate agree to spend three years in a cottage on the coast of North Wales while William risks his life whenever he’s on duty?
Call me a cynic, but I don’t think so.
By John on April 20th, 2010 at 7:30 pm
What of your story that began this thread, about the details of the contract with Soteria Consortium to take over SAR services being finalized by the end of this year?
Privatization of the service may snatch it out from under William’s feet before he has a chance to serve three years. Regardless, I don’t think he can put off full-time Royal duties for three years on the Welsh coast.
I feel certain (with no evidence whatsoever
) that there’s another resolution at hand.
By Dan on April 20th, 2010 at 7:54 pm
Good luck, Dan.
By John on April 20th, 2010 at 8:09 pm
The surest way to be wrong is to say never or always
— favorite Biology teacher
By sojourner on April 20th, 2010 at 8:48 pm
We must have had like-minded favorite biology teachers, sojourner. Mine said “Stay away from the absolutes–they’ll hang your premise in the end.”
By Gigi on April 20th, 2010 at 8:56 pm
Mine said “For Pete’s sake, PUT THAT BACK IN ITS CAGE!!”
By Dan on April 20th, 2010 at 9:29 pm
LOL! Well, that’s the pragmatic approach, if nothing else.
By Gigi on April 20th, 2010 at 9:37 pm
LOL! Mine said, “WHAT are you doing back there???” But, I’m still not telling
By Julie on April 20th, 2010 at 9:41 pm
Happy 84th Birthday to Great Britain’s extraordinary Sovereign, Queen Elizabeth II! Long may she reign! May God bless and keep Her Majesty in His Grace forever.
By Gigi on April 21st, 2010 at 2:04 pm
Indeed, much longer may she reign.
By Dan on April 21st, 2010 at 2:23 pm
Indeed! Happy 84th to the Queen!
Out of curiosity, does anyone know of a good bio about the Queen? (I mean who is to be trusted with the life stories of the royals?) I enjoyed the Tina Brown book about Diana (as recommended on RA) and am extremely happy thus far with the Queen Mum’s biography.
By Meg on April 21st, 2010 at 4:46 pm
“Majesty” and “Monarch” are two well-written works by Robert Lacey about the life and reign of Queen Elizabeth II. There is also an interesting book by Charles Higham and Roy Moseley entitled “Elizabeth and Philip.” I own all three of these works and have read them several times. They include photographs, which are always welcome.
By Gigi on April 21st, 2010 at 5:28 pm
Thank you, Gigi.
By Meg on April 21st, 2010 at 7:16 pm
The Daily Mail is reporting that Camilla has injured her shoulder, as a result of using crutches due to her broken leg.
She and Charles were stuck in Scotland due to the volcanic ash (they must have planned to fly back to London), but finally made the trip on the Royal Train. At least they had options.
I’ve been thinking that the volcanic ash must have caused disruptions for William’s and Harry’s helicopter training, too.
By Evelyn on April 22nd, 2010 at 1:53 am
Trawling the bottom of Google News, I see a report that Kate wants to get married in Edinburgh’s St. Giles’ Cathedral, because she loves Scotland (just wait until she discovers the glories of Anglesey!) and to avoid any semblance to Charles’ and Diana’s London wedding. The report suggests she has even lobbied the Queen for support, but also says it is not possible, because the future King, who will be Supreme Governor of the Church of England, must marry in England. St. Giles’ is considered the home of the Church of Scotland.
Take this “news” for what it’s worth.
By Dan on April 22nd, 2010 at 2:41 pm
Your man Cameron is tipped as winner of the second debate, John. Best of luck!
By Dan on April 22nd, 2010 at 9:40 pm
I certainly gave him the win, Dan, although Clegg was his normal flashy, feisty self. Brown curmudgeonly as usual.
By John on April 23rd, 2010 at 10:08 am
Today is the Feast of Saint George, Patron Saint of England. Saint George is also my Patron Saint. Many blessings to our dear RAers in England on this Feast Day of Saint George!
By Gigi on April 23rd, 2010 at 9:39 pm
Thank you, Gigi, we’ve had a great day.
By John on April 23rd, 2010 at 9:50 pm
I am pleased to hear it, John!
By Gigi on April 23rd, 2010 at 10:45 pm
According to the Telegraph, the Duke of Edinburgh has injured his ankle while driving a carriage – fortunately the injury was not a bad one and the ponies were unharmed. Unfortunately, the groom had to be taken to hospital for treatment for her injuries.
By NCKat on April 23rd, 2010 at 10:52 pm
The new issue of People magazine, which came out today here in the US, has Kate and William on the cover. The headlines read something like: How they keep their love alive; when they will likely marry; when William will pop the question. The newstand I was at will not allow you to read any stories without buying the magazine, so I couldn’t leaf through it. I didn’t want to spend the money as I don’t really like People magazine. But there must be something to this story for them to put Kate and William on the cover. I don’t think they’ve done that before.
By Carol on April 23rd, 2010 at 11:36 pm
Thanks for the information on the Duke of Edinburgh, NCKat. I am relieved that the Duke’s injuries were not more serious and I hope that the groom will recover swiftly. I am also happy to know that the ponies are safe and well. Did the carriage overturn or did the ponies bolt?
Carol, regarding the People Magazine article on Kate and Prince William, I would say that the publisher is just jumping on the band wagon, but something tells me that there may be more to it than that. It is curious that this story is spreading as it is. WHO is fueling it? I must wonder at the source of the information. I never liked People Magazine either, but their information is generally first rate because the publisher is extremely anxious to avoid litigation.
By Gigi on April 23rd, 2010 at 11:57 pm
It’s rare that I see any mention of a royal here unless it’s on the front page of the Enquirer (which is never worth the effort to pick up, as my fellow American readers probably know). But I too saw the People cover, Carol, and I always get excited because of that rarity.
I sure hope this injuring of oneself is not an unfortunate trend this year for the Royal Family. Camilla sounds like she’s having a fairly rough patch this year with her ankle and shoulder. I wish her, the Duke and the groom involved in the Duke’s incident good vibes for quick recoveries.
And I hope your elections over there go the way you all hope!
By Meg on April 23rd, 2010 at 11:58 pm
Gigi, I’m thinking that People is just following Tina Brown’s lead. Unless, like you said, there may be something more to this story. In any case, I hope Kate and Prince William are doing the right thing. May God guide them the right way.
By Carol on April 24th, 2010 at 12:45 am
People is celebrating Earth Day by recycling stories from the last 7 years. Well, that’s one way to do it, I guess…
By sojourner on April 24th, 2010 at 2:10 am
Gigi, the BBC is reporting that Prince Philip’s ponies bolted, and the carriage hit a stump.
By Evelyn on April 24th, 2010 at 2:56 am
Sojourner, if People Magazine wants to celebrate Earth Day, they should suspend publication for an issue or two. Think of all the trees that would save!
Thanks for the information, Evelyn. No matter how skilled the carriage driver, ( and Prince Philip is among the most skilled carriage driver anywhere, despite his age), anything can cause ponies or horses to bolt. They are skittish animals and any sudden noise or suspicious motion can cause them to panic.
By Gigi on April 24th, 2010 at 4:45 am
sojourner, your comment should win Funniest Comment of the Day! Thanks for giving me a good laugh when I really needed one.
By Carol on April 24th, 2010 at 3:20 pm
I heard a suggestion today that PW might wait until Charles becomes King before he marries KM. Anyone think this is out of the realm of possibility?
By Meg on April 25th, 2010 at 12:23 am
If the Queen lives as long as her mother and remains on the throne, Kate might be past her child-bearing years by the time they marry. So, no, I don’t think it’s likely that Prince William will put off marriage until his father is King. It also would give his grandparents great pleasure to see him married, and perhaps welcome a great-grandchild and future heir.
By Evelyn on April 25th, 2010 at 1:04 am
I have always felt that the RF has become, in this day and age, a little crowded or “top heavy.” But as media stories about reducing its size or “demoting” certain members of the RF come and go, nothing really seems to happen. So I suppose there is some logic to the story, which also shows PW and KM’s relationship in a more positive light. And yet, there seems to be little evidence that this is the logic that the RF, or PW/KM are following, for better or for worse.
By sojourner on April 25th, 2010 at 1:06 am
Congratulations to plucky Princess Beatrice and her boyfriend, Dave Clark, for running and completing the London Marathon! She looked terrific and I am very proud of her! I am also pleased to read that her parents, Prince Andrew, Duke of York, and Sarah, Duchess of York, watched her run and cheered her on, greeting her with congratulations at the finish line!
By Gigi on April 25th, 2010 at 5:41 pm
on a light note. I think Kate looked stellar at the wedding! I love the bold red dress!
By london4704 on April 26th, 2010 at 8:21 pm
According to the Telegraph, the Swedish wedding is off:
“The wedding of Princess Madeleine of Sweden and Jonas Bergstrom, a lawyer, was called off on Saturday after Tora Uppstrom Berg, a 21-year-old photography student at Arts University College Bournemouth, claimed that she had had an affair with the prince-to-be.
“They have decided that the best for them is to go their separate ways,” the palace said in a statement, bringing to an end an engagement that reportedly began with a proposal in front of most of the Swedish Royal Family at their summer home.”
They’re not easy to predict these Royal weddings, are they?
By John on April 26th, 2010 at 8:28 pm
So, any rumors about KM having an affair with Swedish photography student?
Think not — girl is too smart and, more important, has seemed to classy by far. In so far as PW goes… well, he should *certainly* know better — what other wealthy and powerful men his generation seem to think is their prerogative is just too risky for him. Again, *poor* Prince Albert of Monaco serves as the example not to follow… But again, and more importantly, he has shown great loyalty to KM until now.
By sojourner on April 26th, 2010 at 8:38 pm
Well, one of the two Swedish royal weddings is off. The wedding of Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden is very much on and will be celebrated with a great deal of joy, pomp and circumstance!
As for Princess Madelyn, I am glad that she found out about Jonas Bergstrom’s flawed character before she took the irrevocable step. I hope he knows what a gigantic mistake he made and lives to regret it. What a total dolt!
By Gigi on April 26th, 2010 at 9:07 pm
http://tinyurl.com/2dxaal8
DM has pictures of latest portrait of HRHs latest portrait. Very nice pictures of the portraits of PC and the DoE as well. PC definitely takes after both parents!
By sojourner on April 27th, 2010 at 1:06 am
Unlike the pending marriage of Princess Victoria, no date had been set for Madeleine’s. Isn’t that odd, to announce a Royal Engagement but not a date?
I think it was half-hearted from the start, regardless of Bergström’s extracurricular activities.
By Dan on April 27th, 2010 at 2:01 pm
Actually, Charles looks more like the late Lord Mountbatten of Burma than he does either of his parents, in my opinion. Of the Royal siblings, Princess Anne, the Princess Royal, looks more like the Duke of Edinburgh, Prince Andrew, Duke of York, looks like both of his parents, and Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex, looks like the Queen.
By Gigi on April 28th, 2010 at 3:00 pm
Well, looks are in the eye of the beholder
But I do think PC looks dashing, and DoE quite elegant, and somewhat softer, and more approachable than in some pictures/portraits… All in all, a talented young artist.
Would love to see him do PW and KM!
By sojourner on April 28th, 2010 at 10:03 pm
The Daily Post’s north Wales news (online) includes a piece on Prince William and Kate shopping for groceries at a convenience store in the area. The store manager wondered if the reason for needing provisions was that the Queen (and Prince Philip) were stopping by for a visit after their official duties in Wales this week.
John, it sounds like Kate may already have moved to Anglesey.
By Evelyn on April 29th, 2010 at 1:46 pm
Checking the Telegraph, they’ve reported that Prince Harry has been assigned to Lynx helicopters, and will be receiving his provisional wings soon. He will have another 10-week training course, specifically in the Lynx.
By Evelyn on April 29th, 2010 at 1:52 pm
Evelyn, I would bet my last dollar that she hasn’t.
It was probably just an overnighter or two.
By John on April 29th, 2010 at 2:37 pm
Well, at a minimum we can assume that she is willing to spend time in Anglesey! Sounds to me like they are getting pretty domestic which bodes well, in my opinion
By Julie on April 29th, 2010 at 3:24 pm
Back to Prince Harry, I see that the Sun is reporting that Prince Harry has been approved to fly Apache helicopters, and will decide “in the next 36 hours” whether to go forward with Apache or Lynx. So I don’t know what the real story is. Maybe we’ll learn more tomorrow.
By Evelyn on April 30th, 2010 at 12:34 am
Re: overnighter
John, I suspect it is yet another case of eye of the beholder. One persons “overnighter” is another’s “partial cohabitation.”
By sojourner on April 30th, 2010 at 2:31 am
LOL!! Sojourner, you are absolutely hilarious!!
By Gigi on April 30th, 2010 at 3:02 am
The Telegraph is running both stories, the first from yesterday saying that he has selected the Lynx, and the second from today, which says he has not yet made up his mind. The two can’t be true.
I suspect the Lynx is more desireable from a Palace perspective, as it is used for reconnaissance and support, while the Apache’s predominant purpose is (how else to put it?) targeting and killing people on the battlefield.
The last thing the Royal Family needs in the press is ongoing reports of Harry’s body count.
By Dan on April 30th, 2010 at 2:53 pm
Especially a friendly fire incident, Dan, or perhaps worse, killing the entire participants in a wedding.
Harry should be kept clear of such possibilities.
By John on April 30th, 2010 at 2:59 pm
From what I’ve read, the Lynx may be more appealing to Prince Harry because of its speed– 200mph, if I remember correctly. John and Dan, I agree with both of you on the problems that will come if PH pilots an Apache.
By Evelyn on April 30th, 2010 at 3:35 pm
I hadn’t even considered John’s tragic possibility. That would be among the worst scenarios, second only to something tragic befalling Harry himself.
I wonder what he feels he has to prove by going back. Sometimes I think he treats war like some kind of thrill ride that he has a right to enjoy. I pray he doesn’t learn the truth the hard way.
By Dan on April 30th, 2010 at 4:29 pm
Returning Prince Harry to a Forward Area in a combat zone is a thoroughly bad idea and I am stunned that the Ministry of Defense is considering such folly yet again. It is a miracle of massive proportions that Prince Harry survived his first deployment! What possible benefit do they perceive in playing Russian roulette with the life of the man who is third in line to the Throne? The horrific scenario John suggests is only too possible and the entire scheme is fraught with incredible peril. What is to be gained by deploying the Prince yet again? The entire idea is utter madness. It makes me feel quite ill and not a little desperate. Someone sensible with high authority must put a stop to this at once, before something dreadful occurs. I cannot help feeling that were the ever loathsome Brown out and the competent Cameron in power, this absurd plan would be quashed.
By Gigi on April 30th, 2010 at 7:19 pm
I would hope that the military’s decision of where to deploy Prince Harry (or any service personnel) is made independent of the politics of the moment.
I hope that Prince Harry’s advisors will help him see that piloting the Apache in Afghanistan could generate a great deal of bad press for the British Monarchy, in many corners of the world.
By Evelyn on April 30th, 2010 at 9:02 pm
I agree, Gigi, but Harry seems to answer to no one but himself when he gets his back up. I can see him stubbornly going back to the front, come hell or high water. He doesn’t seem to have much regard for public opinion.
Perhaps Chelsy can talk some sense into him, although if she couldn’t talk him out of his previous assignment in Afghanistan, I doubt she could persuade him out of this one.
By NCKat on May 1st, 2010 at 12:00 am
I think the fact that Harry has intentionally trained for a role that would return him to Afghanistan has come after a decision on the part of the military and The Firm that they would allow his deployment, if he were to qualify for a position. They may decide to assign him to Lynx instead of Apache, but at this point, I would be very surprised if Harry is not eventually deployed to a forward area.
By Evelyn on May 1st, 2010 at 12:45 am
When one wishes to stand by ones convictions, one must also be able to readily accept the consequences of ones actions. In the US at least, during much of the last decade, “strong belief” was often presented as if it excused responsibility. Nothing futher from the truth.
So the question then becomes: if PH strong beliefs lead him into a situation that is unfortunate (beyond the misfortune of having to take life of others, even for the most righteous of reasons) such as the ones described by John, what will accepting responsibility look like?
By sojourner on May 1st, 2010 at 1:00 am
Let’s not forget that William’s job is extremely hazardous too. Let’s hope at least one of them survives to take the Throne.
By John on May 1st, 2010 at 9:50 am
The line of succession does not stop with William and Harry. It would be a terrible tragedy if their lives were lost. But there have been other occasions in the last two centuries when the crown has passed to heirs that people were not sure were up to the challenge, and their reigns proved to be blessings for those times. We may not have as high a regard for Prince Andrew and Princess Beatrice as we have for Princes Charles, William, and Harry, but there are others in the line of succession.
By Evelyn on May 1st, 2010 at 2:30 pm
I understand your point, Evelyn, but in this particular instance, it is not very practical. If Charles’ and Princess Diana’s sons are killed in combat, then the line of succession after Charles dies goes through Prince Andrew, Duke of York, neither of whose daughters have been given one ounce of training to assume the role of monarch. I do not think we want to gamble with the Throne in such a reckless manner. We cannot ask for more than our share of miracles, after all.
By Gigi on May 1st, 2010 at 6:26 pm
Miracles are given by the grace of God. I don’t think anyone has a certain share, nor are there any defined limits to how many miracles God can perform. But, Gigi, you are right that we should not expect God to give us a miracle.
By Evelyn on May 1st, 2010 at 7:52 pm
According to the Telegraph, it looks as if Kate will have a higher profile in her charity work:
http://tinyurl.com/22ocm2w
It’s an interesting move but I wonder who leaked the news?
By NCKat on May 1st, 2010 at 10:47 pm
Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York, mother of the Queen. Now that’s something to ponder!
I just finished watching the Kentucky Derby and was reminded of Queen Elizabeth’s visit to the Derby in 2007. I wonder if Her Majesty had a wager on today’s race? Calvin Borel, the jockey who rode the winning horse the year the Queen attended, rode today’s winner as well.
By Arthur on May 1st, 2010 at 10:49 pm
NCKat, I read that article as well. I couldn’t help but reread the line that said Kate was given a suggestion to start charitable work BEFORE an engagement was announced. Hmm… That (among other things) kills Tina Brown’s suggesting that an engagement would come sometime this summer, assuming this whole charity story is true. And you’re right, who could have leaked such info?
By Meg on May 2nd, 2010 at 1:18 am
But I wonder if this means that an engagement will be announced by autumn. If Kate is to take a higher-profile role, including a schedule of events that someone could figure out, wouldn’t she need Security? In the past, that Security has always come with the engagement.
By Evelyn on May 2nd, 2010 at 2:13 am
The item was very general and didn’t go into specifics – I doubt they would talk about security just yet. I think it’s just another speculation.
By NCKat on May 2nd, 2010 at 2:19 am
There is a lovely photograph online today of Prince William and Kate attending the nuptials of a couple who are their friends from university days. The article comments that Prince William and Kate are now the last of their circle to remain unmarried.
By Gigi on May 2nd, 2010 at 3:19 pm
They’re saving the best for last.
By Evelyn on May 2nd, 2010 at 7:24 pm
Well said, Evelyn!
By Gigi on May 2nd, 2010 at 9:41 pm
LOL Evelyn!
I just saw a DM item about Camilla that made me see red – on her behalf for once! It was rather catty, hinting that her health issues might make her seem unsuitable to be Queen. I think that’s a low blow. I do admit that seeing Charles wheeling her into the opera gave me pause but only because he was the one pushing her, not a security guard or usher. I don’t think it’s fair to assume Camilla is a liability because she broke her leg or had a hysterectomy – both are temporary conditions.
Now, if it were to be revealed she had a heart condition, that might be different but so far there is no indication that she has – just an inclination to travel.
By NCKat on May 2nd, 2010 at 9:52 pm
Oops – I meant “a disinclination to travel!”
By NCKat on May 2nd, 2010 at 9:55 pm
I’d guess that the DM article was the result of the journalist being assigned to come up with a story on the Royals. They’ve had two on Prince William & Kate this weekend, as well as several on Prince Harry & Chelsy in recent days. Gotta report something….
By Evelyn on May 3rd, 2010 at 12:58 am
The internet is just on fire with stories about a possible engagement…now a ring was spotted, ha! As if that’s how it’s done. These people are crazy. Just let them be and we will all know when it’s announced. Geez!
By Julie on May 3rd, 2010 at 3:15 pm
Unless this next Royal engagement is announced in a very different manner than the former, I would be very surprised to see any evidence of an engagement ring until the photo-op at the time of the formal announcement. Prince William and Kate may not be as concerned with protocol, but the Queen is very concerned with protocol and proper procedure. Somehow I feel that the interests of the Monarch will take precedence in this matter.
As usual, the media is indulging in overkill. By the time the actual engagement is announced, it will be an anti-climax! I would be grateful if it could be arranged for the media to be distracted somehow for a period of time. Let them write about the forthcoming election and leave the Royal Family alone, for all our sakes.
By Gigi on May 3rd, 2010 at 3:48 pm
Gigi, I’m with you 100% as usual
By Julie on May 3rd, 2010 at 4:04 pm
Thank you, Julie!
I must also say that I am trying to recover my equilibrium after reading an article which reports that Gordon Brown is praying for a victory. After counting far higher than one hundred (which did nothing whatever to lower the level of my ire), I proceeded to pray that Almighty God loves Great Britain enough to grant us a defeat for Gordon Brown and a win for David Cameron. I have no vote in Britain, but I can surely petition the Almighty, fervently, frequently, fulsomely, as I have hope of Heaven.
By Gigi on May 3rd, 2010 at 4:28 pm
Knock knock.
By Positive on May 5th, 2010 at 5:10 am
Wow. Didn’t think my login info worked anymore. Good evening all. See you when the engagement is announced.
By Positive on May 5th, 2010 at 5:11 am
Apparently you’re checking in as preparation for the big announcement “soon?”
By Julie on May 5th, 2010 at 8:32 pm
New publishing date for the Robin Nun book on PW and KM is March 2011. Do they have some info, or are they just hedging their bets?
By sojourner on May 6th, 2010 at 12:09 am
Election Day in Britain has finally arrived! May it please Almighty God that at the end of this day, Cameron shall have won and Brown shall issue his farewell address!
By Gigi on May 6th, 2010 at 11:18 am
I think that will happen, Gigi. I voted first thing this morning so the Tories had an early lead
It’s going to be a long day today and an even longer night. Plenty of provisions prepared though. I shan’t be up to much tomorrow, methinks.
By John on May 6th, 2010 at 11:28 am
Let it be known that our Gigi has beseeched the Almighty in favor of Gordon Brown giving a speech!
By Dan on May 6th, 2010 at 1:11 pm
I see in the Telegraph that the Queen has already said that if the outcome of the election is close, she won’t invite any party leader to the palace until 1pm Friday. When there is a clear winner, she has met with the leader on Friday morning.
I’ll be watching the UK news from across the pond, John.
By Evelyn on May 6th, 2010 at 2:39 pm
Evelyn, we’re hoping for a quick, clear result, with Dave called to the Palace on Friday. But, as always with Labour, there are 50 police investigations of fraud already going on. This could delay matters unless there is a wide gap at the top.
By John on May 6th, 2010 at 2:44 pm
So, John, with the stricter laws around reporting of results/voting numbers, when will you know the outcome? My understanding is that this could be a tight race with the third party having gained some traction. I’m with you that Cameron would be the best choice.
By Julie on May 6th, 2010 at 3:17 pm
Julie, there will be exit polls just after 10 pm when the polls are closed (5pm EST), but they are often inaccurate and are likely to be more so this time because of the strong third party.
Tory seats come in later than Labour so the true picture won’t emerge until much later in the night, unless a landslide is happening.
I don’t believe it will be as close as predicted, but it will be unpredictable until around 3 or 4am our time.
Fasten your seatbelts, we’re in for a very bumpy ride. And keep some tranquilizers handy.
By John on May 6th, 2010 at 3:31 pm
PS: I wrote here some time ago that William and Kate might be waiting for a Tory Government before tying the knot. We may soon be finding out if that’s true.
By John on May 6th, 2010 at 3:33 pm
Yes, if tomorrow weren’t a work day, I’d dust off the martini glasses with you
As it is, a wine glass might come in handy but the good news for me is that I’ll have a good idea before I go to sleep tonight at my usual time. (If all goes according to plan and it’s not too close of course.)
By Julie on May 6th, 2010 at 3:35 pm
Ha! I had that thought again this morning as well
By Julie on May 6th, 2010 at 3:35 pm
Keeping my fingers crossed for a Tory win for England!
By Myra on May 6th, 2010 at 4:39 pm
If Cameron wins the election, we shall celebrate with a Royal Anecdotes Gala Thanks Be To God Tea!!! Dan, even I can stand another speech by Brown as long as he is saying goodbye!!
By Gigi on May 6th, 2010 at 7:01 pm
My goodness this is enough to make a person crazy. I hate that it’s taking so long….I know, I know…it isn’t instant. Sigh!
By Julie on May 7th, 2010 at 12:35 am
Wow. I agree Julie. I see Gordon Brown has kept his seat.
By Meg on May 7th, 2010 at 12:39 am
What!!?? Where did you see that? I’m watching the numbers on BBC but I did not think it was decided. I had heard earlier that the numbers would more likely go the otherway as the evening went on. Tell me I did not misunderstand!
By Julie on May 7th, 2010 at 12:56 am
They’re not saying he’s won PM, but he did get enough votes in his area to keep his seat going. (I’m not clear on English politics, but my fiance is, and says he’s in a good spot right now.) I’m watching it via internet since BBC America is only showing episodes of Star Trek. >_< They aren't saying it's decided yet, but it sounds like they are predicting a slim labour win.
By Meg on May 7th, 2010 at 1:07 am
Ah, well, I don’t know much about any of this. So I can’t argue but I sure hope it goes the other way. Thanks for explaining.
By Julie on May 7th, 2010 at 1:11 am
I wish I knew more about it as well. It looks like a tense atmosphere around Britain right now. After this, I’ve set a goal to learn as much as possible about politics over the pond. I wish I could explain it more. I realize my very vague description of what I’ve seen so far is hardly worth reading (since I don’t know what any of it means) and our fellow RA’ers would do much better. I hope the elections swing in their favor!
By Meg on May 7th, 2010 at 1:15 am
I’m getting a bit of a crash course tonight from my British husband, but it’s mighty confusing and complicated.
Though he won’t be British much longer – in less than two weeks he’ll take the oath of citizenship and become an American!
By Leslie on May 7th, 2010 at 1:19 am
Leslie…congrats to you and your husband! So, is he in agreement with Meg’s husband?
By Julie on May 7th, 2010 at 1:21 am
Brown keeping his seat means he will remain a member of Parliament, but only one of 650. He’ll still be a minister, but not the PRIME minister.
Is it likely he will resign his seat? Do former prime ministers simply return to the back benches?
In the US, once you’ve been President, it would be rather odd to go back and run for a seat in Congress. Of course, a former President’s spouse might want to run for something.
By Dan on May 7th, 2010 at 1:40 am
LOL, good one, Dan! Thanks for the info!
By Julie on May 7th, 2010 at 1:54 am
The Telegraph is reporting that it’s been decided – Harry will fly Apache helicopters, which will bring him closer to going back to the front: http://tinyurl.com/2c977hq.
By NCKat on May 7th, 2010 at 10:13 am
Brown has kept his seat which means he’s still an MP, but his party is well behind the Conservatives. He will not be a minister unless Labour forms a coalition government with the LibDems — unlikely, I think.
Cameron will speak in an hour or so on how he will form a government. It could be with LibDems or with others, or he could run a minority government.
By John on May 7th, 2010 at 12:11 pm
Dan, I don’t think Brown will stay in Parliament. His party is ready to chuck him out as leader. Unless of course he does a deal with the LibDems and remains as Prime Minister, which would be disaster and very toxic for the LibDems.
The logic is that Cameron will become PM in a Con/Lib government.
By John on May 7th, 2010 at 12:14 pm
I read that Nick Clegg, the LibDem leader, has said that Cameron should have the opportunity to try to form a government, since the Conservatives have more seats than Labour.
Any news on visits to Buckingham Palace?
By Evelyn on May 7th, 2010 at 12:32 pm
I guess I don’t understand the system. If Brown’s constituency has elected him, how does he not remain an MP in parliament?
By Dan on May 7th, 2010 at 12:37 pm
As for Harry’s choice, I have to assume that he wants to commit his life, as his brother will, to service to his country, and not merely in a support position. Some might wonder if it is a death wish. It certainly is a means to one-up his brother, who, as a SAR pilot, could never match Harry’s potential regard among other military personnel.
At this stage it is all potential. But if he succeeds as a flying ace or worse, dies in battle, it will be something none of us foresaw: a shadow from which William may never fully emerge.
Competition between brothers almost never ends well.
By Dan on May 7th, 2010 at 12:43 pm
Perhaps once Harry is in Apache training, he’ll come up short, and be transferred to Lynx. That seems to be our only hope now.
I wish Prince Harry had read all our RA posts on the topic of his choice. I really wish he’d chosen to fly the Lynx.
Maybe if Chelsy agreed to marry him???
By Evelyn on May 7th, 2010 at 12:51 pm
Maybe if he agreed to marry Chelsy is more like it.
By Dan on May 7th, 2010 at 1:03 pm
No, I think it’s the other way around. I think it’s Harry who is completely smitten with Chelsy, and Chelsy who isn’t sure she wants to marry into the Royal Family.
By Evelyn on May 7th, 2010 at 1:11 pm
Let us all pray that Prince Harry is not assigned to a forward area and that if he requests such duty, the Ministry of Defense puts the needs of the Kingdom first and retains the Prince in non-combat duty. Let us also pray that David Cameron can form a government and that he becomes Prime Minister as swiftly as can be managed. I would prefer that Brown not return to a seat in Parliament, but at this point I believe that it is unwise for me to ask the Almighty Father for three VERY large favors, so I shall not request that He remove Brown as an MP. Will someone in the UK please post as soon as we are sure that Cameron is MP so that Dan can begin to open the champagne and I can set the tea table?
By Gigi on May 7th, 2010 at 1:43 pm
Tea may need to wait awhile, Gigi. I’ve been monitoring BBC.com, and there still is a lot of negotiating to do. If I understand correctly, the last time there was a hung parliament, it took 4 days to sort out.
By Evelyn on May 7th, 2010 at 1:53 pm
Oh Dear, this is complicated! The most seats, the most votes and still not a winner? Um, why? I’m sure there is a logical explanation however, I can’t say it makes sense to me.
By Julie on May 7th, 2010 at 2:05 pm
The Conservatives don’t have a majority of the seats. They have less than half the seats, so will need to either find other partners who will work with them OR rule as a minority government, seeking different partners for every legislative initiative.
At least, that’s what I gather from what I’ve read. I could well be wrong.
By Evelyn on May 7th, 2010 at 2:09 pm
It’s being reported that talks between the Tories and LibDems will begin tonight, by telephone. Gigi, don’t start the tea yet.
By Evelyn on May 7th, 2010 at 2:42 pm
Maybe just heat the water? Pleeeease! *fingers crossed*
By Julie on May 7th, 2010 at 2:43 pm
I fear that if Gigi starts the water anytime soon, it will all be evaporated before tea time.
By Evelyn on May 7th, 2010 at 2:45 pm
Ah, Evelyn, you’re clearly smarter and more patient than me.
By Julie on May 7th, 2010 at 2:58 pm
Um, Gigi…. What do you mean “so that Dan can BEGIN to open the champagne?”
*HIC*
By Dan on May 7th, 2010 at 3:08 pm
Dan, if Brown is elected by his constituents, as he has been, he remains an MP in Parliament, but not a Minister or Prime Minister unless he can command a majority of MPs in the House. At present he is a minority Prime Minister simply because he has not yet been replaced by the Queen.
It’s looking as if the Conservatives and LibDems will strike a deal tonight or tomorrow and David Cameron will be Prime Minister on Monday.
By John on May 7th, 2010 at 3:13 pm
Prince Harry received his wings today. The Daily Mail article says he will have about 16 months of training on Apaches before he’ll complete his training course.
Thinking ahead, that would give time for Prince William & Kate to marry ahead of Prince Harry’s deployment to Afghanistan. I am sure everyone would like Harry to be able to be at the wedding.
By Evelyn on May 7th, 2010 at 3:35 pm
I shall, as Evelyn wisely suggested, refrain from preparing the tea until the Queen sends for Mr. Cameron and asks him to form a government. How, please tell me, how is it possible that our own Dan has somehow managed to find the hidden key to the wine cellar–yet again!? I have hidden it in every single inaccessible place I can think of, and still he finds it!! Might it be possible for someone to crawl under the sideboard, extricate Dan and the champagne glass and bottle, and get as much strong, hot coffee into him as possible, without carnage? Will the RAer who takes on this perilous but heroic task also favor me by confiscating the key, securing the wine cellar and hiding the key someplace so utterly unlikely that no one but the Almighty could possibly find it? My dear Dan, your covert skills are so honed that you really should have offered your services to the CIA!
By Gigi on May 7th, 2010 at 3:56 pm
Well, I’ll certainly help…Dan, may I have a drink please? Or is that not what you had in mind Gigi?
By Julie on May 7th, 2010 at 3:59 pm
Does a new Prime Minister have a swearing in ceremony and take an Oath of Office, like the US President, or is he/she simply appointed Prime Minister by the Queen during a meeting at Buckingham Palace? I can’t recall ever seeing an inauguration ceremony for the British Prime Minister
By Arthur on May 7th, 2010 at 4:00 pm
The vote tally stands:
306 for the Conservative Party
258 for the Labour Party
57 for the Liberal Democrats
28 seats for various smaller groups
One final seat has an election coming up later in May; I don’t know why.
326 seats would be needed to be a majority. If the Conservatives are able to strike a deal with the LibDems, they could form a government. What little I read is that the LibDems want electoral reform, though I know nothing of the details.
Some are reporting that Clegg and Cameron have had their first phone conversation.
By Evelyn on May 7th, 2010 at 4:17 pm
The Queen calls the politician who can command a majority in Parliament to the Palace and he “kisses hands” on appointment. It’s done in private and there’s no other ceremony involved.
The depiction of this in the film The Queen was comic and not accurate.
By John on May 7th, 2010 at 4:36 pm
Thank you for posting that, John. It is one of the most irritating scenes in the movie because of it’s inaccuracy. I also cringed when I saw that they depict Robin Janvrin as Queen’s Private Secretary at the time of the death of Princess Diana, when, in fact, Robert Fellowes was still in that office during those tragic events.
By Gigi on May 7th, 2010 at 5:06 pm
Gigi, while it’s too early to have any kind of celebratory tea, it would be comforting to gather and be fortified by the delicacies only you seem able to prepare for us. Could you put together a few things that we could nibble on while we await the outcome of parties’ negotiations?
By Evelyn on May 7th, 2010 at 5:08 pm
John,
If a Con/Lib government is formed, how long do you suppose that it will last, given that it will be based upon an alliance rather than Conservative Party majority?
Thanks,
Lisa
By Lisa on May 7th, 2010 at 5:36 pm
Lisa, I would think David Cameron would want to call an election as soon as it was winnable — say, under two years. However, he will have to push through some very unpopular austerity measures, so may find that difficult.
By John on May 7th, 2010 at 5:40 pm
Well, I’ve tried to convince Dan to share but so far no luck! Gigi, I second the notion of a tibble or two to sustain us, please
By Julie on May 7th, 2010 at 5:40 pm
John – thanks. It seems like a less than optimal situation either way for David Cameron. I am really interested in seeing the role that the Queen will have. I hope that she does not end up having to perform her constitutional role in a no-win PR type of situation.
By Lisa on May 7th, 2010 at 6:45 pm
Quite right, Julie, I am sure we could all do with something to soothe our post-Election Day nerves. Rather than tea, since it is early evening in the UK, we shall have cocktails and hot and cold canapes. Julie, if you will assist me by passing the hot canapes and Evelyn, I would be grateful if you could pass the cold canapes while Dan and I pour and serve the champagne. We have stronger libations on the sideboard, which I hope our own Arthur will be willing to serve for me. Dear RA friends, our Royal Anecdotes Dear Heaven Please Sustain Us Through the Election Aftermath Gala Cocktail Party most merrily commences! Please, all of you, join us in the festivities.
By Gigi on May 7th, 2010 at 6:46 pm
Absolutely, I’d be happy to help…one for you…one for me…one for you…;)
By Julie on May 7th, 2010 at 7:01 pm
gigi – thanks for another fantastic spread – are we drinking till they get this sorted out?!
By coni on May 7th, 2010 at 7:22 pm
My dear Coni, I fear we may have to!
By Gigi on May 7th, 2010 at 7:32 pm
The papers are coming out now…is it typical for them to be this brutal? The politicians seem to be playing much nicer
By Julie on May 7th, 2010 at 8:48 pm
Since I’m aaaall the way over here on the other side of the pond, I have to ask. Is Gordon Brown the type to admit he’s been defeated? Or is it going to take a higher power to step in and say, hey, you’ve been defeated now bug off?
By Meg on May 7th, 2010 at 11:41 pm
It seems more like the latter than the former, honestly. I just read a piece about him in the Telegraph and he sounds like a real bugger.
By Leslie on May 7th, 2010 at 11:44 pm
What I’ve read about British political history lately is that in an election that results in a hung parliament, the prime minister is more or less expected to keep control of government until someone is able to muster a coalition or some other arrangement of support for a new government (there are several levels of support, some short of coalition).
In fact, what I had read several places before the election was that, in a hung parliament, the current prime minister usually would be granted the first shot at forming a government.
I think that’s why Nick Clegg’s statement that first shot should go to the Conservatives is seen as pretty unusual. That isn’t the way it’s been done in the past. It might be part of the LibDem’s strategy for becoming part of a coalition government, with their expected proviso of electoral reform.
But all this is from a newbie. As said in a previous post, I could be wrong about any of it.
By Evelyn on May 8th, 2010 at 12:14 am
Wow, see Chelsy at Harry’s graduation ceremony. Is that her first turnout at an event with the Family?
Sounds serious.
By Dan on May 8th, 2010 at 2:34 am
Does anyone think that it is significant that Chelsy was seated with Princess Diana’s sister, Lady Sarah, instead of with Camilla? This is not, after all, one big happy family. The Spencer family is not exactly on the warmest of terms with Charles, especially since Princess Diana’s funeral and the pointed, stinging eulogy written and bitingly declaimed by Lord Spencer, Princess Diana’s brother. I would feel that Chelsy’s presence at Prince Harry’s ceremony was more a signal of acceptance of the seriousness of their relationship had Chelsy been seated with any member of the Royal Family–even Camilla–rather than a Spencer.
By Gigi on May 8th, 2010 at 3:11 am
Would it be wrong of me to think of Chelsy as a more outgoing Diana? She seems so strong willed and fun that maybe sitting with Diana’s sister was more comfortable? I love Chelsy. She’s got some character that I think is just fun.
By Meg on May 8th, 2010 at 3:33 am
Chelsy was at the ceremony awhile back (1 yr? 2 yrs?) when Harry and his unit received medals for their tour of duty in Afghanistan.
Perhaps Harry invited his aunts to mend some of the family rift. It could be that Harry asked Chelsy to sit with them.
Camilla didn’t look overly happy in the photos I saw.
By Evelyn on May 8th, 2010 at 3:38 am
The article I read said that Chelsy moved between the groups and was well recieved by both Diana’s sisters and the Royals present. It was implied that everyone was happy she was there for Prince Harry.
By Julie on May 8th, 2010 at 4:16 am
Chelsy was also a guest at Peter Phillips’ and Autumn Kelly’s wedding a few years ago and there were quite a few Senior Royals present, including the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh. I don’t know whether or not Chelsy was introduced to the Queen, on that occasion, but Chelsy was certainly close enough to bask in the Royal spotlight.
By Arthur on May 8th, 2010 at 4:44 am
Arthur, I don’t recall that Chelsy was at Peter Phillips’ wedding, and I can’t find a write-up or a photo that supports it, either. There were many “significant others” at the Phillips wedding–all recorded on film by Getty Images– but none of Chelsy. The photos of Chelsy at Prince Harry’s military ceremony on May 7th are wonderful and show her in the company of Lady Sarah, Lady Jane, Tiggy Legge-Bourke and a lady in a red ensemble whom I cannot identify. As was stated earlier by one of our RA clan, the photos of Camilla show her looking quite subdued and downcast. She is probably tired of being in a cast and a wheelchair.
By Gigi on May 8th, 2010 at 4:53 pm
Gigi, I seem to remember that Chelsy was there at that wedding and that it was the first occasion she was presented to the Queen.
I could be wrong, but I’m fairly sure she was present.
By John on May 8th, 2010 at 7:50 pm
You are right, John and so is Arthur! I finally found the Telegraph article and another from thegloss.com which supports her and Kate’s presence at the wedding. Evidently, both young ladies stayed out of the wedding photos on purpose but they were photographed at the reception following by HELLO Magazine photographers. Their names also appear on the wedding guest list which the Telegraph at some point published. An article published in the Telegraph prior to the wedding says that Chelsy will be presented to the Queen at the wedding, but no article following the wedding reports that it happened, however. Nevertheless, I imagine that we can be fairly certain that Prince Harry presented Chelsy to the Queen either at the wedding or at the reception.
By Gigi on May 8th, 2010 at 10:05 pm
Great detective work Gigi!
By Julie on May 9th, 2010 at 12:05 am
Ah, rumors the Prince Harry wants to wed Chelsy Davy are making the rounds (from some very random and unreliable sources). Could it be these mysterious dates in June are for Harry?
Poor chap. I feel bad that his horse died at a polo match. I read he took it hard.
By Meg on May 9th, 2010 at 5:38 pm
I would be surprised if Harry married first — there is no evidence that he and Chelsy are anywhere near that stage in their relationship and they both have significant career ambitions. Also, it would only intensify the pressure on William.
Chelsy will have to wait until Harry has fulfilled this military dream of his, which seems to be at least two years off.
By Dan on May 10th, 2010 at 11:32 am
The trouble is, we don’t know what any of their plans are, and those we are fed by the media are usually false.
I only ever believe the BBC, which insists on a double confirmation at source, and usually the Daily Telegraph which adopts a grown-up policy of checking.
By John on May 10th, 2010 at 12:50 pm
I don’t think that Prince Harry should be compelled to wait to marry the girl of his choice. The former Duke of York (who became King George VI) wed Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon at a time of their choosing and did not wait for his recalcitrant older brother, the Prince of Wales (who became the uncrowned King Edward VIII and then abdicated, taking the title of the Duke of Windsor before he married Wallis Warfield Simpson) to wed. If Prince Harry does, indeed, wish to wed Chelsy Davy and yet has not announced plans, that seems to indicate to me that there are plans progressing secretly and swiftly for the announcement of the engagement and forthcoming marriage of Prince William and Kate Middleton, which would make the delay of Harry’s plans a necessity. Prince Harry would obviously be one of the small, padlock group of persons who would know the details of Prince William’s future course. Regarding this matter of Prince William’s future plans, I must say that this is the best kept secret in Royal Circles in my lifetime.
By Gigi on May 10th, 2010 at 1:32 pm
Breaking News is reporting that Gordon Brown says he will step aside to allow his party to negotiate with the Liberal Democrats. Another report says that Brown has agreed to resign by September. September??! John, what on earth is going on?
By Gigi on May 10th, 2010 at 4:42 pm
Gigi, typical Brown. He’s agreed to resign as Labour leader when a new one is chosen in September — it takes that long. He’s also started negotiations with the Lib Dems to form a government.
We should know more tonight about the Conservative attempt to coalesce with the Lib Dems.
I would much prefer a minority Conservative Government which would go to the country in the autumn and win a big majority.
By John on May 10th, 2010 at 5:22 pm
I agree with you, John, that would be my preference, as well. I find it very difficult to believe that any person with full intelligence who cares about the Kingdom cast a vote for Gordon Brown to remain in power. Whomever those unfortunate persons are, they need to re-examine and re-order their priorities.
By Gigi on May 10th, 2010 at 5:29 pm
I have just finished scanning online versions of the Times, the Telegraph, the BBC News and others and I am not certain that I understand where we stand regarding the election. My dear John, would you shed some light on this matter? I was hoping for David Cameron to “kiss hands” at the Queen’s pleasure yesterday, and here it is Tuesday and I have no earthly idea what we are doing, if indeed we are doing anything whatever.
By Gigi on May 11th, 2010 at 2:16 pm
Gigi, as I write the Conservatives and duplicitous Lib Dems are meeting to decide their future. They will probably do a deal.
The alternative is a minority Tory Government, which will be short-lived leading to another General Election.
This is becoming very wearisome, with 24-hour TV news journalists losing their temper on air. We are all very ragged.
We should know more by this evening (British Summer Time).
By John on May 11th, 2010 at 2:37 pm
Thank you, John. I did see that several of your media persons very nearly came to fisticuffs during a broadcast, which is quite unlike the British, to say the least. Of course all of you are exhausted and frustrated–how could you be otherwise? I hope the principals will make an end as soon as humanly possible. Tonight would be just grand. I also agree with your assessment of the behavior of the Liberal Democrats, who ought to be thoroughly ashamed of themselves but who are, I fear, chortling with glee in the cloakroom like addled schoolboys!
By Gigi on May 11th, 2010 at 2:51 pm
Gigi, I’m hearing that Labour has all but given up in the face of huge public outrage, not least myself.
We will probably hear of a Con/Lib pact by this evening. All the chatter is pointing that way.
Thank the Lord!
By John on May 11th, 2010 at 2:56 pm
There are reports on the BBC that Gordon Brown’s baggage is being loaded into cars as I write.
It also looks as if the Conservatives will form a pact with the Lib Dems later today — “The only deal in town” (Lib Dems).
Could David Cameron go to the Palace this evening? We await the Queen’s helicopter from Windsor imminently.
By John on May 11th, 2010 at 3:06 pm
Gordon Brown is at long last exiting Number 10? This is good news indeed!! He’s made an utter mess of the Government, done untold damage, behaved like a perfect fool and ended his watch by giving an impression of an unprincipled thug! I shall be thrilled if he slinks away to an existence characterized by political obscurity. John, do favor us by posting when you hear that David Cameron has, indeed, been summoned to audience with the Queen!
By Gigi on May 11th, 2010 at 3:19 pm
I will indeed, Gigi. I’m on permanent watch at present, monitoring various channels and outlets simultaneously.
You’ll get more detailed info in Syntagma.
By John on May 11th, 2010 at 3:23 pm
I’m putting the Palace activity into a rolling piece on this site. So if you want to comment, put it on the new thread — this one is getting over-long
By John on May 11th, 2010 at 3:26 pm