E! News: Duchess Kate has been passive-aggressively ‘advising’ Cressida Bonas


All of the tabloids (American and British) are saying that an engagement is going to happen any day now between Prince Harry and Cressida Bonas. Lord, I hope it happens soon. I’m being serious. It will be so much fun to cover another royal engagement, and I think Cressida will handle the whole business of being a “royal bride” very differently. Anyway, as you can see, Us Weekly is all over Cressy and Harry. Highlights from the cover story (via Jezebel) include: Harry calls her “Cressy,” her family is “rich but unconventional,” and Cressy’s family nickname is “Smally” (she’s the youngest kid). She listens to Mumford & Sons, she spent six months serving pizza in Sydney and she and Harry love to go out for burgers. They also go bowling, and Harry’s bowling name is “Ginger Queen” (priceless) and Cressida “does a regular commute” with commoners to her theater marketing job.

As for the pending engagement and how Cressida is handling everything, well… E! News has a story and it’s full of wonderful, funny details. Details like… Duchess Kate is “advising” Cressida passive-aggressively.

It sounds like Prince Harry and Cressida Bonas are moving closer to marriage! The 29-year-old royal and his 25-year-old girlfriend have already started planning for their future together, a royal source reveals exclusively to E! News.

“Harry and Cressida have made a point of talking about marriage and what changes they’re going to have to make to their life of late,” the source says. “According to friends of Cressida’s, the couple have decided to try and keep their semi normal lifestyle as long as physically possible.”

“Up until now Cressida has loved the fact they can have a lot of freedom in public, they don’t hit the headlines when they go to dinner and they can enjoy their relative anonymity around Chelsea,” the source continues. “But they are fully aware once they decide to proceed to marriage things will get a little crazy and the attention on them will increase. So it’s very much a ‘let’s enjoy this while it lasts’ before they move forwards.”

The royal insider adds that Kate Middleton has been super helpful when it comes to dealing with the increasing spotlight on Cressida.

“Kate’s been brilliant with Cressida and has been giving her advice,” they say. “She likes her very much and has offered her tips on how to keep her normality. Kate’s been there and done it and, while she knows Cressida won’t be as talked about and followed like she was, she needs to get a real slant on what happens.”

As for Harry’s impending proposal, the source dished, “Cressida has also had initial talks with the palace about what will happen once they do announce their engagement and the way things will work. Harry has told his crowd that he knows he will wed Cressida but he wants to ensure their life doesn’t become a circus. He’s not half as important as William with regards to the throne and wants his privacy to reflect that. They want to be able to enjoy normality far more than Wills and Kate can. They’re not surrounded by the protocol like the elder royals—they can sway the opinion as young royals. They both feel they deserve the chance to live out their married life in as normal a way as possible.”

The source says that the lovebirds aren’t living together yet. “She’s been staying at his for months but they’ve not moved in together as such,” they added. “She likes her space! And he’s away so much anyway. So they’re kinda living together but not made a home yet!”

[From E! News]

“Kate’s been there and done it and, while she knows Cressida won’t be as talked about and followed like she was…” HA. I mean… hahahaha. It’s true that Kate was followed a lot and she was a “celebrity” for years while she waity’d for William to propose. So, in that sense, Cressida doesn’t have it as badly as Kate because Harry will actually propose to Cressida within two years of dating. Which is something that Cressida might be able to passive-aggressively throw in Kate’s face. Also, I suspect that Cressida is not going to need the same kind of intensive “princess lessons” that Kate needed (and perhaps still needs). Cressida is tight with the York princesses, and Cressida has been rolling deep with royalty and aristocrats since birth. She’ll known instinctively how to behave, I think.


Photos courtesy of Getty, WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

230 Responses to “E! News: Duchess Kate has been passive-aggressively ‘advising’ Cressida Bonas”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. ArchOh says:

    Who cares? They all live off the state anyway like the benefit scroungers they are. Kate needs to get off her high horse too, Wills only had to procreate with her because the royals are so inbred and they needed fresh DNA… If they keep on like this then they’ll become even more unpopular than they currently are in the UK. They need to remember who funds their lifestyles.

    • LadySlippers says:

      It’s somewhat of a myth that they all live off the tax payer.

      • Sandra says:

        No it’s not, it’s well documented that they live off subsidies from the government, which are funded by taxation.

      • LadySlippers says:

        No again, the ‘subsidies’ are from The Sovereign’s Grant which are profits from the Crown Estates and not every Royal is even entitled to them. Elizabeth II doles out the funds to reimburse working Royals for their expenses. Most Royals need trust funds to live like they do which most have and those aren’t tax payer money.

      • Sandra says:

        From the official website of the monarchy,

        “The British Royal Family is financed mainly by public money, but there are also a number of private sources of income. The British Parliament meets the cost of the Sovereign’s official expenditure from public funds. This includes the costs of the upkeep of the various royal residences, staffing, travel and state visits, public engagements, and official entertainment.”

      • LadySlippers says:

        If you look most of the money is for their staff and offices with all the public and official duties being funded by public funds. And it states ‘public money’ which doesn’t necessarily mean taxes. Furthermore, it does not mean every single one of them live exclusively off the public either — that’s the perception I’m talking about.

        Using the York Princesses as an example, they are not working Royals so they do not have offices/ staff nor do they even have RPOs that are publicly funded (Andrew pays for the RPOs out of pocket). So they mostly live off their trust funds. On the other hand the Wessex’s are working Royals so do have their office and staff paid for by public funds and they receive funds from the Sovereign’s Grant. However, they now only get RPOs when working so not full time anymore.

        It’s not as cut and dry as you think.

      • JustVisiting says:

        LadySlippers is right, it’s way more complicated than ‘Damn royals are taking our money.’ In fact, here’s a super easy to follow video that explains it.


      • LadySlippers says:

        The Royal Blogtini has written several posts about it as well.

      • HoustonGrl says:

        What?! What do you call 1.5 million dollars of home renovations? They are most certainly living off taxpayers.

      • LAK says:

        That royal blogotini has several things wrong and many incorrect assumptions.

      • LadySlippers says:

        It depends on *where* the funds are being pulled from and that’s the tricky part. A lot of the Royal Finances come from a variety of sources and not all is bourne at the tax payer’s expense. To make matters worse, unraveling what comes from where is often a nightmare.

        So the amount you are quoting might have been pulled from several places — we just don’t know where. And that’s my point — it’s an assumption, and a bad one, that they live entirely off the tax payer.

        @LAK: True, no one blogger is perfect but in this case her reasoning does make sense.

      • LAK says:

        Ladyslippers: I could go over what they’ve written point by point, but it would turn into an essay and many of the people who post on here are very well versed in the royal finances (and other royal matters) so I shan’t bore about it, as I have already done so in other posts.

        I will say this, whoever is blogging there, is pronouncing themselves an authority on the matter, and yet a cursory glance shows up glaring errors in assumptions and or facts to support their case.

        I’m more inclined to believe the republican blog on royal finances even though *they* have an axe to grind, but they support their calculations with as many facts as they can find despite the lack of transparency accorded the royal finances.

      • bluhare says:

        Actually, HoustonGrl is making me think about the taxpayer subsidization issue, and I’m going to argue they are subsidized by the taxpayers as they live rent-free in Kensington Palace, right? What would a 40 or 50 room apartment in London rent for a month? The public owns KP, so if they’re living there rent free doesn’t that make it the world’s nicest council house?

      • CynicalCeleste says:

        And I think it’s worth considering the origins of their private wealth and the money for those trust funds.

      • LadySlippers says:

        @LAK: I’d love to know which Republican blog you are speaking about. And I’ve found The Royal Blogtini has been very open when you respectfully point out errors in her logic. You are right — she does get some stuff wrong. But so do others, myself included.

        @bluhare: I’ve never said that taxes aren’t a part of ‘public funds’ but it’s false to say that it’s *all* taxes — and that’s the incorrect assumption most people make.

        For example, the dual Royal duchies of Lancaster (income for the Sovereign) and Cornwall (income for the eldest son/heir of the Sovereign) both generate monies from their estates. And my guess is it’s the same for other ancient duchies too (I can’t find the article but according to this article, land ownership hasn’t changed much in England since 1066. When land was divvied up post-Conquest, those families that benefitted then still pretty own the same % of land as in 1066. So if you’re going to be mad at the BRF, then some if that anger should be directed at ALL the families that benefitted post-Conquest).

        In addition, I can buy items from the Cornwall Duchy here in the States that line Charles’ pockets. That’s just one example of income the Royals generate that has nothing to do with taxes.

        @CynicalCeleste: That indeed is part of the nightmare that is the Royal Finances. But there are trust funds that come from relatives that do not enjoy all the Royal benefits, in addition to those that do. As I said above, a lot of the ancient noble families in England have enjoyed immense benefits due to the generosity of William the Conqueror.

      • bluhare says:

        Actually, Ladyslippers, I wasn’t talking taxes. I was talking rent subsidy. As the public owns the building in which they live and they live there rent free, they are being subsidized by the taxpayer.

      • LadySlippers says:

        @bluhare: Ahhhh sorry for my misunderstanding your comments.

    • Juliette says:

      They really are inbred. When you see photos of Victoria’s children, and her grandchildren, and her great grandchildren, and even her great-great grandchildren, there is a shocking family resemblance. That’s what happens when you marry your cousin. Prince Michael of Kent is a doppelganger for Tsar Nicholas II. His son Frederick Windsor resembles the “Jack-the-Ripper” Prince Eddy. Queen Elizabeth looks like Mary of Teck. Princess Beatrice looks like Queen Vic.

      Even Charles and Camilla look alike and as it turns out the chances are they are cousins too. Her great-grandmother was mistress to his great-grandfather and allegedly, he fathered one or more of her children. If Charles and Camilla had spawned, it would be as if they had cloned themselves. They resemble each other and they resemble all the Windsors of the past. A small pool of genes, and not one carrying a cure for baldness.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        The royal inbreeding was largely a result of the demands of dynastic politics and the social mores of times past. It is dangerous – the Spanish Habsburgs became so inbreed that the line died out in the late 17th century (one of them even married his niece) – and Queen Victoria (who carried the hemophiliac “gene” – don’t know if it is genetic or chromosome marker) was indirectly responsible for introducing hemophilia into the Spanish and Russian royal families – one of the Spanish heirs as well as the last tsarevitch of Russia suffered from hemophilia.

        A more modern example (apparently without health issues) is the marriage of ex-king Constantin of Greece and his wife ex-queen Anne-Marie (sister to Margethe II of Denmark). The both descend from Christian IX of Denmark. She on her father’s side, he on both his mother’s and his father’s side. Her parents weren’t thrilled when he asked for her hand in marriage – but I think that was mainly because she was only 16 at the time (they were married when she turned 18). There is a funny anecdote told by Constantin: When he asked King Frederik IX for permission to marry his youngest daughter, the king promply locked him into a bathroom and went to discuss the matter with his wife, Queen Ingrid. I find that pretty funny!

        All the European royal families are related in one way or the other – mostly through the descendants of Queen Victoria of England (Europe’s Grandmother) and Christian IX (Europe’s Father In-Law + 3 of his sons became kings: in Denmark, Norway and Greece). That is one of the reasons they don’t intermarry anymore. Another is the fact that they no longer need royal-born spouses for dynastic alliances. The royal families of Europe no longer have any political power as their countries are constitutional monarchies.

        The Danish painter Laurits Tuxen (who was the premier royal portrait painter in Europe) did a family portrait of Christian IX of Denmark with all his children, their spouses and his grand-children. That portrait includes not only the Danish RF but also the King of Norway, the King of Greece, the Prince of Wales (later Edward VII) and the Tsar of Russia. It is a good example of how intermarried the royal families of Europe was in the late 19th century:

      • LAK says:

        Duchess of Alba!!!!

        That’s all i’ve got….

      • ArtHistorian says:

        I give you Charles II – the last Habsburg king of Spain (he died in 1700). He was born with multiple physical and mental disabilities – due to the excessive inbreeding of the Habsburg dynasty. In fact, they stopped to outbreeding around 1550.

        Here’s a portrait:

      • Juliette says:

        Art Historian is right! The Habsburg inbred chin went from a normal albiet fairly large and prominent chin, growing generation after generation until it became a complete deformity appearing in the person of Charles II, whose chin was so enormous and misaligned to his face that he was perpetually drooling and unable to close his mouth.

        I’ve always found it a fun game to pick out the Habsburg portraits in a gallery. You can always tell a Habsburg by their jaw, even the lesser relations who never sat upon a throne carried the family trait.

      • LAK says:

        Juliette, me too. It makes museum visits much more entertaining to spot the hapsberg chin.

        With the Hanoverians, their most prominent feature seems to be the eyes, so we play spot the hapsberg and the hanoverian.

        Of the current BRF, i’d say Andrew, Beatrice and Frederick definitely have the Hanoverian eyes.

        Ps: there is a really low rank family member called Zenouska Mowatt granddaughter of Princess Alexandre who also resembles Victoria with exception of the eyes. She’s on the balcony during the balcony appearances, but she’s a teen/young adult, so not so prominently displayed via clothing. Her face shape, nose, mouth are pure Victoria.

      • bluhare says:

        LOL, LAK!

        Art Historian, love the portrait link. What a lovely painting.

      • Rockymtnprincess says:

        Good call on the Beatrice/Victoria resemblance.

      • ArtHistorian says:


        I remember the first time I saw a portrait of him in the Gemäldegalerie, Kunsthistoriesches Museum in Vienna. I was completely gobsmacked!

      • WillowDreamer says:

        I have learned so much about royalty from you ladies on this site.
        Thank you for sharing your knowledge with such wit!
        I looked up the picture on Charles II….very scary indeed.
        I read more about him from Wikipedia… he was mentally and physically disabled which may be obvious.
        His tongue was so large many could not understand his words as well as the constant drooling. He did not speak until he was 4, did not walk until he was 8, and was treated as an infant till he was 10.
        Charles II did not attend school and was not expected
        to be clean. He did marry but did not have children which was probably a good thing!

    • Archaeologist says:

      Some interesting comments here, especially from LAK who I can only assume is a royal correspondent…
      The royal family relies heavily on the taxpayer to subsidise their extravagant lifestyle and European royalty has a huge problem with close genetics. There are plenty of fascinating DNA studies on this, its simply to go onto google scholar and find them. Most of them are free as well.
      Im glad I started such an interesting thread, I just hope that the internet doesn’t become obsessed with these benefit scroungers once again. Britain should be investing in our NHS, employment for young people and staying in the EU rather than supporting this out of date concept of ‘birth privilege’. We should certainly not be idolising work shy women who rely on their menfolk to feed, cloth and house them…

      • Charlotte says:

        I learn so much from the posters on here! Always very interesting.
        LAK and LadySlippers are wonderful on BRF subjects. Thank you, ladies!

  2. Jessica says:

    If Harry and Cressida are so keen to have privacy and have a normal relationship, he could always renounce his claim to the throne, stop being an HRH and go live a civilian’s life with Cress.

    So annoying that the princes whine about privacy and how they want a normal life, but then fully enjoy the perks being a royal gets them.

    • Spikey says:

      Seriously, I can never understand the disgust Americans (!) express over the young Royals on this site. Yes, they’re lazy, entitled, rich kids, living the life of lazy, entitled, rich kids. You guys, that is the essence of monarchy! Go check your history books. Monarchs exist to represent wealth and status. The more they bedazzled their contemporaries with pomp and circumstance, the more respected they were. (Because, doh, a country cannot afford the lifestyle of a prince and his court without full coffers ;)) It’s a game of dress-up and it has always been.

      And as for the royal Brits: they are a huge publicity asset. The UK attracts more tourists for them, they make the UK look good internationally. Even when they play strip snooker, they still look good. (I don’t have hard data for this, but it seems reasonable to assume that they bring in their upkeep from tourism and their business connections alone.) I come from a country that is internationally famous for Sauerkraut and Nazis. Boy, I’d trade that legacy in for partying princes and sausage curls any day.

      • Tatjana says:

        I don’t understand the need forr royals, and I’m not American 😀
        I always wanted to visit Britain, and the royals never had any part in that.
        Would Britain really loose tourists without the royal family?
        You are from Germany? I hope you’re joking about what you guys are known for. It’s the favoirite country I ever visited. And German is my favoirote foreign language. Why would you want to trade with anyone?

      • Isadora says:

        Spikey – everything you said. +10000

        I mean look at Ludwig II. of Bavaria. He was possibly mad (or not – conspiracy, conspiracy), extravagant and well… let’s say he wasn’t exactly a financial or military blessing for Bavaria. And then he drowned himself (or not – again the conspiracy). But he’s still one of the best things that happened to Bavaria imho. I mean, Neuschwanstein alone is like a magnet because everyone loves a good, crazy dreamer who was a Wagner fanboy.

      • Ponytail says:

        Well, if you are German, they’re your Royal Family too – we ran out of Royals back in the late 17th century and borrowed from Germany (Hanover ?). There have been regular Teutonic injections of new freeloaders since then too.
        The idea that tourists come over because we have a monarchy is an economic myth. We have a number of tourist attractions that are popular because of historical events, but really, the number of tourists that come here solely because of the current Royals is a minority of our overseas visitors.

      • bluhare says:

        I dunno. I really like Sauerkraut. And Berliners. And schnitzel, and I almost forgot spaetzel. And I had the best potato salad of my life in Germany, and I’m a world renowned potato salad connoisseur. Plus the bloody BEER.

      • Isadora says:

        Schnitzel is mostly Austrian (Wiener Schnitzel/Viennese Schnitzel). And of course it’s originally Italian (from Piccata milanese).

        And I really do have a friend who travels regularly to London, because she’s an absolute fan of the Queen & Royal family and therefore the UK as a whole. And yes, it’s nuts, I love her. 🙂

      • bluhare says:

        Oops on the schnitzel! But I think my point was I really liked Germany, I’d go back in a second, there’s tons of history and they have no royals!

      • wolfpup says:

        I lived in Ansbach, Germany for three years, and felt (still do) that if I were German, I would be in Germany. It was such a wonderful experience; Volksmarching, beer festivals, flower boxes in all the windows, castles and all the ancient stuff, the outstanding German National museum, the cathedrals and the art, the “work hard and play hard” ethic, shutting stores down for 2 hours for lunch and on weekends, (so enlightened)…I could go on… Spikey, in my mind this far exceeds sausage curls and immature princes.

      • HoustonGrl says:

        “Yes, they’re lazy, entitled, rich kids, living the life of lazy, entitled, rich kids. You guys, that is the essence of monarchy!”

        While this may be true, that doesn’t make it right, and it certainly shouldn’t be publicly funded by those who oppose such a system.

      • FLORC says:

        Wei gehts es dir?
        I went to ansbach as an exchange student in high school! Then I went to the side of the country in Aachen for a study abroad trip in college. So beautiful in both areas. Small world.
        It is so gorgeous and you’re right. Incredibly hard workers (and partiers).

      • bluhare says:

        Es geht sehr gut, FLORC. Und Sie?

        That’s about the extent of my German. I tried to learn some when I was there a few years ago. Loved Germany, and would like to go back.

      • Flower says:

        Germany still has royals, there are dozens of princely families who still live in the family castles, they just don’t collect state funds any more. I think the point is that a vast percentage of tourists come to see the history in both countries and a large part of that history is a direct result of past royals and nobles, what would British tourism be without the past deep pockets of the nobles and royals who built the hundreds of castles and stately homes that visitors flock to every year.

        The biggest tourist attractions in all European countries were built by royals including many museum buildings, libraries, Cathedrals, churches and parks . There would be no Versailles, no Louvre, no Palace of Westminster (Houses of Parliament), no Regents Park, no Westminster Abbey, no Winter Palace or Kremlin buildings, no Pitti Palace, no Florence, no Prada museum. They are all a direct result of Royal rule and just the tip of the iceberg. Vast numbers of paintings and art objects found in museums today are directly attributed to Royal patronage. Would we have had the daVinci, Botticelli or Michelangelo that we know of today without Royal Patronage.

        Sure they did it on the backs and pockets of their subjects but the magnificent buildings and open spaces in cities, even protected forest areas still exist because Royals had the money, will and vision (and ego) to build them in the first place.

      • FLORC says:

        Ja! BlauKaninchen,
        Sprechen sie Deutsch auch? Kleine welt.
        Mer geht es gut. Nicht so groß nachtdem Onkle Terry artkel.
        Where did you learn german?

        Fun fact.. My favorite word in german is Schiltkröde. Fun to say.

      • LadySlippers says:

        @Flower: VERY true.

      • bluhare says:

        FLORC, I took a college class, but mostly I listened to CD’s and did lessons in my car while I was commuting to and from work. I’ve still got the CD’s; I should pop them in the car.

        My German’s awful. I tried, but the lovely Germans I ran into we so kind, they answered me in English. I asked the Starbucks person how to say “mocha” in German, and she said “mocha”. LOL.

    • pleaseicu says:

      If Harry didn’t renounce his claim and royal life for a life with Chelsy, I don’t think he’s going to do it for anybody. JMO.

      I think Cressida is still around and their relationship increasingly more public because she’s one of the rare ones willing to make the changes to her life, privacy and freedom and follow the protocol to be a royal spouse. This privacy nonsense and living a “normal” life is just press BS. She wants the title and jewels like Kate IMO. Hell, she gave up a dream career following her passion of dance and theater to take some marketing consultant job with a flexible schedule for Harry. She’s definitely following the pre-engagement playbook IMO. She’s just got a better handle on how to deal with the press and curry favorable PR than Kate did at this stage of her pre-engagement playbook IMO.

      • LadySlippers says:

        This story is most likely BS.

      • bluhare says:

        What part, LS?

      • LadySlippers says:

        @bluhare: I’m calling BS on pretty much the whole thing.

        IF Cressida needed Royal tips, why wouldn’t she go to her friends the York Princesses? Wouldn’t that make more sense? She’s been friends with both for years and has been in their world long enough to assume they’ve all built up a solid trusting relationship. Basically long enough to ask their help before Kate’s…

        Also, I honestly don’t think Cressida wants to get married soon. The one DM article I posted stated she’s comfortable with the slow pacing of the relationship and isn’t rushing anything (the quotes said that but the article dismisses it, and I tend to ignore the editorial comments from the DM).

        Marriage ‘rumours’ have LONG been a press thing. We’ve seen it before with a variety of people. And we’ve seen it for years, if not decades, and it’s just a press concoction to sell papers/ magazines. I could be wrong here but don’t think I am.

      • LAK says:

        Kate and her plan for getting the ring has done a disservice to everyone marrying royals, past, present and future.

        Kate waited William out and only got a job AFTER being publicly shamed into it. And even then, made sure it didn’t interfere with her waitying programme.

        There is no reason to put your life on hold or not have a job simply because you might marry into the royal family.

        Kate took a gamble (and waged a campaign) which paid off. FOR HER.

        Diana, Sarah, Sophie ALL had jobs until they married. There was never a question of changing their routine to enable a favourable royal outcome.

        In the case of Sophie, she managed to run her own business for some years whilst carrying out royal duties, and no one ever ventured the BS that she was a ‘part time’ royal or was somehow being eased into the job.

        Don’t get me started on the European inlaws none of whom waitied out their prince kate style. Kate’s waitying campaign tells us that was the effort required to snag William. It doesn’t mean that every other royal will require the same sort of effort.

        Since Kate’s waitying campaign was so visible and transparent, everyone expects future potential royals to wage a similar campaign, and will be judged accordingly and lacking what ever they do.

        No one knows for sure why Cressida decided to give up dancing. Her last dance school promotes and arranges professional auditions, perhaps she wasn’t good enough. Maybe she took it as far as she could. It’s so easy to put her decision on wishing to waity out Harry, but that might not be the true reason. However, in the Harry/Cressida romance, she’s already been cast in the waity mold with little information to go on. People can’t give her the benefit of the doubt that she has a job less than a year AFTER university and wasny publicly shamed into getting one.

        I have some faith (lol) that Harry doesn’t want a waity because for 7yrs, he was with someone who wasn’t a waity. It didn’t work out in the end, but he gave it 7yrs. That’s indicates that he doesn’t want a waity. By contrast, William very quickly ditched or didn’t wait out anyone who wasn’t waitying for him and his personal needs. That’s what works for William. Harry has shown us that he is different from William, so perhaps Cressy isn’t as waity as people assume she is based upon Kate’s example.

      • LadySlippers says:

        Agreed LAK.

        People also assume that because of Diana that every Royal in-law wages their own personal PR campaign and that’s also not true. The Middleton’s (IMO it’s really either William or with William’s blessing) do throw PR bones out there but if they had a PR firm managing their image it’d be much better than it is now.

        Basically people have to stop thinking one or two people’s behaviour describes everyone and that just isn’t true. In the BRF and elsewhere.

      • bluhare says:

        Derp. Excellent point about Cressida’s friendship with the Yorks. Totally zoned on that one!

      • LadySlippers says:


        A lot of these BS articles obviously don’t know their subjects and miss clues like the Yorks’ friendship with Cressida.

        And the quotes don’t match up. Cressida’s brother (a named source) stated she’s not rushing towards marriage so that’s what and how I compare my other quotes to. Named sources are a very big deal. The one DM article supported her brother’s quotes and the quotes in that article make sense overall. These in the USWeekly article don’t make sense in relation to Cressida’s brother’s quotes.

        American gossip rags usually only repeat crap from the British ones and they don’t borrow from the better ones either. Americans also typically don’t have any real sources either.

        Plus they keep spinning the same crap over and over. Engagement rumours move issues which is why we see so many of them. So I weed through those as it’s usually total BS.

      • My2Pence says:

        I really don’t know what to call the general attitude that has been building for months. The Cressida anti-fandom? The Anti-Cressida Faction? We do not know if she wants to marry Harry. SHE probably doesn’t know yet if she wants to marry him. A little early to say she wants fame, tiaras, and the royal ballgame and not the man or that she’s playing games and the press to get that HRH in front of her name.

        We know next to nothing about this person. She went to school, has a job, has famous relatives, is friends with the York Princesses, and seems to be dating Harry. To me it looks like most of this preemptive criticism of Cressida comes from:

        A) bitter tweens, teens, and twenty-somethings whose dreams of being a princess have been crushed because Harry has DARED to date someone other than THEM

        B) ardent Kate Middleton fanatics who think that if Harry dates or marries Cressida, it is a stab in the back to “poor middle class outsider Kate Middleton”

        C) the intersection of sets A and B where they are emotionally projecting their own poor self-image into the situation and taking it all personally

        The people who are doing their utmost to vilify Cressida, it appears to me thus far, seem to be mostly members of A, B, or C groups listed above.

      • FLORC says:

        100% agree with all of it. Well said.

      • Tatjana says:

        Well, I’m neither A, B nor C. I don’t like Harry, I don’t like Kate and I don’t like Cressida. To me, she seems just like another upper class hipster boho failed dancer who couldn’t even fake interest during a charity concert. And I will keep disliking her until proven wrong.

      • Tatjana says:

        How on Earth does a dance major get a marketing job?

      • FLORC says:

        Lots of places hire people with degrees different than what you may think is required.

        I know a dance major that works in one of the worlds leading insurance companies. The ree just shows you are able to learn and have a larger spectrum of knowledge with English and Math. Lots more goes into it, but that’s the basics for in the US. Is the UK different?

      • Tatjana says:

        That doesn’t make sense. Here, you don’t get to do jobs you’re not qualified for.

      • LAK says:

        Tatjana: In the UK, unless your description job is specifically dependant on your course of study eg Medicine, you can study whatever you want at university. As an example, i know 2 people who are lawyers despite one having a maths degree and the other a music degree.

    • eliza says:

      Yes. Very annoying.

      • wolfpup says:

        I kind of like her because she is willing to yawn in public: a contrast with the perpetual grin.

    • Green Girl says:

      If Harry wanted to, I doubt he would renounce while QEII is still alive. She thinks being a monarch and being a part of the BRF is a job for life. Harry knows it’s a job, too, and said as much during an interview about two years ago.

      Who’s to say he’d even think of renouncing, anyway?

      • LadySlippers says:

        @Green Girl:

        None of the Royals can renounce their claim.

        But your right about his granny though.

      • bluhare says:

        LS, Prince Michael did in order to marry Marie Christine.

      • LadySlippers says:

        He did not renounce it.

        At the time, if you married a Catholic it automatically removed you from the line but left your children in place. Assuming they didn’t convert to Catholicism (which has happened and removed them from the line as well). It was automatic per the law but it is not the same as renouncing. (That’s why Autumn converted to CoE so Peter didn’t lose his place upon marriage)

      • bluhare says:

        He renounced if you make the argument that by marrying her he lost his place. It was a choice he made, right? So maybe it’s renunciation by default, but he lost his place nonetheless. I don’t think you were referring to his children converting, as they are still in line.


      • LadySlippers says:


        No, the children of the D & Dss of Kent have converted with their mother losing their place in line (as have others). I was speaking overall of the law not of Prince Michael’s children specifically.

        Renouncing usually removes you *and* your line so while the two look similar they aren’t though. Renouncing isn’t a simple matter and isn’t allowed per British Law as it’s written now. However, marrying a Catholic is a byproduct of a law created in a different era. I don’t see marrying a Catholic as renouncing per se because it doesn’t affect your children’s placement only the person marrying a Catholic or becoming one themselves.

    • LadySlippers says:

      Harry cannot (none of them can) renounce his place in the line of succession.

      There would need to be a law passed in the UK and in the entire Commonwealth for that to be able to take place.

      • Green Girl says:

        I had no idea about that! Thanks for the heads up.

      • LadySlippers says:

        @Green Girl:

        No problem. A lot of people don’t know this. I actually didn’t either until I read it in a book about Royals and it makes a lot sense though.


      • Liberty says:

        I didn’t know this! So the Wallis Simpson issue resulted in a different sort of side door, then — one can abdicate as King, otherwise…gin and endurance?

      • Flower says:

        I think the King/Queen can make a proclamation removing titles and precedent from individual with the blessing of the parliament. I’m not sure of the precise details but many British princes were stripped of their royal titles and claims to the throne during WWI, most of them were closely associated with Germany or indeed were close relatives of the Kaiser and were deemed to be enemies or potential enemy sympathisers or spies . Hence they were removed from the line.

        So some provision to remove royal title does exist but only via the monarch and it would require a whole heap of red tape. I don’t think Harry would bother with it, he could just opt out of the public eye if he wanted to and not participate in royal duties, but that would never happen he likes the voice it gives his charities and I think he really enjoys his royal work , unlike William.

      • LadySlippers says:

        Abdication IS something every Sovereign or Monarch can do and that was illustrated quite poignantly by Edward VIII (David to family). However, it is something you can only do as Sovereign and not available to anyone in the line of succession.

        As for gin and endurance… Well there are many kinds of liquid coping choices. I think they can take their pick, yes?

        @Flower: What you are referring to is the power that comes directly from the Sovereign (they are seen as the font and source of all titles). So in 1917 George V issued a Letters Patent (essentially a Royal proclamation) that stripped all titles of anyone that had taken up arms against the UK, stripped all British citizens of their German titles (including the BRF), and reconfigured who was entitled to be called Prince/Princess with the style and address of HRH. It also removed HH and Prince/Princess from male line great-grandchildren and gave them the titles accorded to children of a Duke. There was a lot covered in those Letters Patent. 🙂

        ETA: Titles are the indeed a Sovereign’s matter but removing a person from the line would have to be introduced as a law and then passed in the UK and by all the Commonwealth nations.

    • My2Pence says:

      Whatever the steps would be to remove themselves from the line – if that is possible in any way – wouldn’t change anything. The press would not stop following William or Harry if they weren’t “working royals” anymore. If anything, that would probably give certain people more leeway to go after them. I do think Billy the Bully uses the idea of his eventual abdication to keep HM and Charles off his back, but he’d never actually do it.

      With all of the perks and horrors that come from their position of privilege, they have to learn to live with it. Own up to it, figure out how to live a life of service and find happiness in it, and keep your ridiculously-expensive vacations to a minimum.

      • LadySlippers says:

        @My2Pence: I agree, both William and Harry would be under the spotlight regardless of titles due to the fascination of both Diana and the Wales’ spectacular war and divorce.

        I actually do sympathise with William. That was until LAK pointed out he could have married a nice Catholic woman and spared himself (and us) a lot of misery. Although that would have probably broken both his father and his granny’s heart. But he sure as h*ll would have been happier.

        *teasingly shakes her fist at LAK*

        Asking William to come to terms with his birthright? Geesh, aren’t YOU asking a lot.


      • LAK says:

        Ladyslippers: considering how close he is to the catholic Van Cutsems, it’s not in the realms of impossibility that he would have found a lovely, rich [even if not aristocratic] catholic lass to marry.

  3. Beatrice says:

    Kate tips:
    1. Use lots of heavy black eyeliner.
    2. Go on lots of vacations.
    3. Keep your sister away from my husband.

  4. blue marie says:

    Ha ha ha, I’m sorry but with the rep Kate has, why would anyone take her advice? Plus, doesn’t Kate dislike Cressy’s sister?

    • FLORC says:

      This story is all kinds of BS.

      Kate certainly showed herself to be territorial and insecure when it came to pretty girls around William. She came off looking very desperate. If this is the kind of advice Cressy is getting I would love to be a fly on that wall.

      And a bit off topic, but Kate seems like a schemer! Any advice Kate gives is either deluded with the wrong impression of how she thinks she’s coming off and how she’s really being perceived. And that she’d likely give Cressy advice so she messes up. Girls can be terrible!

      • LadySlippers says:


        I agree that this story sounds like BS as the DM article had a quote that Cressida isn’t ready yet for marriage. That essentially echoes what her brother said about a year ago.

        The press is trying (IMHO) get issues moving. So it this is spun for money and nothing else.

      • Juliette says:

        I cannot see Kate as a schemer. She’s just not clever enough to mastermind a scheme. As everyone knows, her big life accomplishment was “schemed” by her mother Carole, who arranged to find out William’s school choice and arranged to find his housing accommodations and set Kate in his path. Kate’s role in the scheme was patience. Pure, simple, patience.

        If Cressida ever gave Kate the chance, Kate would probably offer passive-aggressive advice! She’s a self-absorbed, empty-headed woman. We’re not talking about a brilliant mind capable of subtlety and nuance. We’re talking about “how do you make tea” Kate. Carole’s got the strategy, Kate would consult with her before telling Cressida anything.

      • Mel says:

        Juliette, K’s snatching the prince may or may not have been schemed by her mother, but she is the one who pulled it off (and it must have entailed more than mere patience).
        Not that it’s a particularly brilliant achievement – or catch – mind you.
        Just saying.

    • Dame Snarkweek says:

      But this would only nake sense if Kate wanted Harry. the two of them have grown close over the years so I think Kate would want to help Cressy so Harry will be happy. plus she would have another royal wife to talk to/hang out with. idk, though. i could be asking for too much, lol.I am not sure where the aggressive part of this headline comes into play. The E! Story seemed favorable to both ladies imo. More fabricated, fake girl drama. Get a clue, media – not all women are adversarial.

      • LadySlippers says:

        I see your points Snark but I think this whole story is BS. In one of the last DM articles there were quotes that stated that Cressida isn’t ready for marriage. The article went to spin marriage rumours but the quotes said otherwise. I again think this story is BS.

      • FLORC says:

        Dame Snarkweek
        Not really. Kate can be the main hen or alpha dog of sorts as far as females in her circle. She may have no authority or power anywhere, but here’s my reasoning.
        She’s already married to an heir, Gave birth to an heir. Cressida is only a gf of a spare. and much younger. I can see a line of reasoning where she would take Cressida under her wing.

        There was a fun piece of fiction written where Kate was bursting into rooms around KP like there were no doors or assumed privacy. She would burst into Harry’s bedroom and office because William was always away. Harry was polite, but became annoyed… And if Kate wanted friends she would make them… RAF Wives anyone?

        I just see Kate as more of an insecure snake of sorts on this specific topic. And if push comes to chove Harry wouldn’t take too kindly to Kate sabotaging Cressida. Harry is polite. He’s not a moron.

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        I loved your comment – I was laughing at the picture you painted of Kate bursting into rooms. It is quite possible since Kate was raised in a loving, close-knit family with (probably) few boundaries/limits. But I can assure you that Harry and Kate enjoy a great friendship. It is easy to paint Kate as the mocked outsider that people put up with for Will’s sake but several things show this to be untrue, imo.
        1. Harry and his friends used to tease Kate behind her back because her mom was an airline stewardess. Once Kate and Will became more serious Harry got to know her better and grew to like her.
        2. Harry spent more than a little time at Will and Kate’s place and, believe it or not, they spent a lot of quiet nights just cooking and watching movies, harry was always the bartender.
        3. Before Kate and Chelsy fell out the four of them used to be very close and spent a lot of time together.
        4. Harry and Kate have been photographed/videotaped on several occasions sharing a private joke or laughing mischievously at something while Will looks stiff and somber.
        5. After the engagement Harry was quoted as calling Kate lovely and something along the lines of her being the sister he never had/the best sister anyone could ask for.
        5. After the wedding ceremony Will and Kate went back to the hotel to rest before the Queen’s reception. Did they order champagne and put a do not disturb sign on the door? Nope. Will, Kate and Harry put on bathrobes, piled into the king-sized bed, had snacks and watched the whirlwind of media coverage/highlights of the event, reportedly laughing hysterically at themselves on camera.

        I think this speaks to a relationship that is honestly caring and respectful. Kate used to keep a close, hawk like on her wandering prince but I have never heard anything to substantiate that she is a bitch to other females. There is some discord between them and the Yorks, possibly but the stories are conflicting. I can’t see Kate working enough energy to sabotage Cressy. To what end?

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        You’re right. The media played the same game with WillKat. I think the assumptions will shame Harry into proposing or at least make him fast-track a proposal. I doubt he would pop the question before the AU/NZ tour anyway.

      • LadySlippers says:

        If Cressida is serious about liking the slow pacing, I’d guess she’d want a solid year of being ‘out there’ before venturing into marriage. I base that on the fact that they both went a solid year before going public which meant that they wanted all the bumpy first months private and have a solid foundation in which to brave their public outing. Life will change a lot and it might look different from the side lines. She might yet decide that the hot seat is a bit much for her. And I give Harry enormous props for shielding her and allowing them to unfold slowly no matter what their outcome is.

      • bluhare says:

        Snarky, doesn’t it seem like that’s cooled a bit though? I haven’t seen the same kind of laughy jokey photos we used to see in quite a while.

        What I think is interesting is that Kate and Pippa aren’t photographed together these days and they were always touted as being close.

      • wolfpup says:

        Interesting observation, bluhare. Why aren’t they out shopping together?

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        Agree. Maybe that year of relative calm was the best gift Harry could give Cressy. William did similar for Kate but because they dated longer Kate was exposed to the media much longer. But the world didn’t really know about Kate until she and Will were caught canoodling on the ski slopes. Those were the early days when he truly was mad about her. Seems like a *lifetime*ago.

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        You know, you’re right! I wouldn’t say Kate and Harry’s friendship has cooled. Nothing that we know of publicly has happened. But I think Kate is simply not being pap’d with anyone these days. Good observation. Now I wonder why.
        I would bring out my old nervous condition/breakdown theory but FLORC will yell and LadySlippers will slap my wrist. *whispers* but I think Kate is a bit “compromised” at the moment and is being held together with string.

      • LadySlippers says:

        Is Harry laying low so we’re just not seeing him at all anymore? Could the same be true of Kate too? Are the press really backing off of papped pics post France? Nonetheless, it is an interesting observation.

        And Dame my dear, I so respect your title and would never physically admonish another titled woman! However at my next fancy schmancy soirée I *might* just snub you… 😉

      • FLORC says:

        Dame Snarkweek
        I cannot take credit for the image you got. On another blog someone posted the story. Kate burst into Harry’s bedroom while he had a girl in there (just sleeping off the night before *wink*) and another time in his office.

        Also, Harry gave an interview very close in time to the engagement announcement saying something to the tune of not really knowing Kate and that William might not be settling down anytime soon.
        From all i’ve gathered about how Harry knew Kate as Williams gf was he thought she was very clinging to a stalker level (also how they teased) and didn’t know much else. Kate was in their circle, but not accepted.

        I think there is truth to what you’re saying, but also propaganda after the fact.

        And I think Harry is nice to everyone. He keeps the peace by doing and saying what he needs to. Because Harry got Kate to giggle at a few stiff outings does not scream friendship to me.
        BTW I saw a pic of what I think you’re describing. William looks off vacantly. Harry points out to the sky. Kate looks giggidy and laughing. And someone photoshopped some baby keys in Harry’s hand… Hah!

        And Dame… Please share your theories with us… Just know I have the wet wiglet in the wiglet wagon and I will give you lashings!

      • bluhare says:

        Snarky, I wouldn’t be surprised to find out Kate is not wound as loosely as she seems either.

      • TG says:

        I completely agree with you that the media likes to pit women against one another but I wouldn’t believe anything from E News. They seem to be in competition with People to see who can get further inside celebs a$$es. I can barely watch them anymore.

      • fairy godmother says:

        Why would there be any belief that Waity has scooped Watercress under her wing?
        Honestly, if we all look at Waity’s performance and overall attitude does anyone think for a second the palace or Harry would want Waity advising a potential newcomer into the BRF?
        If anyone would give advise one would think HM would appoint Sophie since she has managed so well.
        Besides I think this is all bs (synonymous with PR) to try to make Waity look better in the public’s eye and appear as if she is busy behind the scene.

      • FLORC says:

        Fairy Godmother

        These headlines happen because it’s laying foundation. Foundation for future headliness like…
        “Cressida Betrays Kate”
        “Kate in tears over Cressidas Betrayal”
        “Harry and Cressida Make move to pass over William for King”
        “Cressida sabotages Kate’s big day!”
        “Prince George picked on by 1st cousin watercress the villianous”
        It will only get worse…

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        My assertions are based on several easily proven facts. Therefore, there is very little else I can say if you insist on simply hanging on to the frat boy snarky comments Harry and his friends made about Kate years ago. The rebuttals you made seem to be comprised mostly of conjecture without a lot of provable facts. But I have gotten used to the fact that you don’t think Kate deserves much credit. The truth is, sadly, there are many in which she has not earned a lot of credit. But in all honesty, I see no hard facts to back up the opinion that Kate is a scheming, girl-hating snake, ready to sabotage poor Cressy and bring her down. It makes sense on no level to me. She worked too hard to land her prince just to turn around and start drama in the RF. The mistakes Kate makes are usually out of ignorance and vapidness, not sheer malice.
        * suspiciously side-eyes the keys to the wiglet wagon, knows Florc keeps the wet noodles in the glove box*
        Now as for Kate’s mental state, I will throw out my crazy conspiracy theories, even if Ladyslippers tells the servants not to refresh my mimosas at the next foxhunt breakfast.
        1. Kate had a mini-meltdown when she got sick while pregnant and William happened to be “away” for that weekend. Carole came to her rescue.
        2. Kate had a meltdown when her OB-GYN nurse committed suicide.
        3. I have no proof, but I believe Will prevented her from considering the use of drugs during her labor and delivery, which may have been an extremely difficult experience for her. William said in a CNN interview that Kate was physically shaking as they stood outside the hospital with baby George for the first time.
        4. As the couple left Westminster after the ceremony, Kate was seen on camera mouthing the words “are you happy” to William; not in a blissful manner but in a hand-wringing way. I think her nerves are always fried around and because of him.
        5. Leading up to the wedding, there were rumors of Camilla and Carole going toe-to-toe over Kate. That plus countless other factors made Kate look nervous, jumpy, fragile, and waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too thin … almost brittle. On her wedding day, Bobbi Brown was flown in to do the makeup for the wedding party. At the last minute, Kate nervously wiped away all of the makeup and nervously reapplied it herself.
        6. Carole seems to have been given more leeway and consideration by the RF than a lot of people think is necessary, but I don’t think that this is because she is pushy. No one pushes Charles or the Queen around. But I do think that the grey men look to Carole to keep Kate calm and moldable. So Mother knows best.
        7. Jessie Webb was called out of retirement because Kate was probably “not well” immediately following Georges birth and they needed someone in a hurry who was extremely discrete and loyal. This is why Kate fled to Middleton Towers after the birth.
        8. This is why Kate has to be very careful in choosing the new nanny for George and Carole will continue to supervise. Carole is keeping more of a watchful eye on her daughter than on George, who is in good hands.
        9. William spends as little time as possible around Kate these days because he cannot tolerate the hot mess she has become, and he knows deep down that he is to blame.
        10. Lastly, until Kate is “better”, everyone behind the scenes is trying to keep Kate away from the public as much as they can get away with it. They know that this means she will be seen as idle and lazy, but they would rather deal with those criticisms than to put Kate out there for engagements and have the media and the public eventually figure out the truth.
        I told you guys that my theories about Kate’s mental health would get me yelled at, lol! And even though my thoughts might be extreme, I believe that there is absolutely something going on.
        *Hops down from soapbox*

      • LadySlippers says:


        I have no doubt something is ‘off’ but not willing to actually label it as anything more than that. Yet.

        But, and it’s a pretty big but(t), that might explain why Kate isn’t working more. She might not be able to and they might be hiding her so it doesn’t turn into another Diana fiasco.

        Hmmmmm…. I think your mimosas are safe… for now. 😉

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        *raises glass* Clink!

      • bluhare says:

        Actually, you guys, we talked about this a while back before you started posting, or if you were you weren’t nearly as much as you do now. There was a discussion about whether Kate had anxiety of some kind due to the fact that she appeared to have some conversational difficulties for a while and really struggles with public speaking. Even though she was with William for a long time, we talked about whether the reality of being under the microscope was getting to her and whether that was the reason she wasn’t working as much or had as little interaction with others as she does.

  5. FLORC says:

    And so it begins…

  6. HoustonGrl says:

    One nice thing about Cressida is that she doesn’t seem totally work-shy. And since she’ only 25, I don’t think she’ll use the baby thing as an immediate fall back.

  7. vangroovey says:

    Mean girl confession: I hope Cressida is a natural; is genuinely interested in charity and emerges as the UK’s favorite daughter. I know. I KNOW! It’s mean! It’s just that I am the opposite of a Will fan.

    Prediction: she is going to look AMAZING at her wedding; comparisons will be drawn to the Cambridge nuptials….where Kate looked presentable, but utterly….well, to be honest, I think Kate looked the worst she’s ever looked at her wedding…personally.

    • I am with you! I guess I’m a mean girl at heart…..if Harry ends up proposing, you know that Cressida is going to be outdoing Kate in EVERYTHING. Everything. By the sheer fact that Cressida has a LIFE outside of Prince Harry. They’ve probably known each other, because of her friendship with the York sisters, but we don’t see Cressida following Harry around. She does her own thing. If this all comes down to a wedding, I would love if she started on the ground running—and would laugh and giggle at all the bitchy commentary that you celebitches (especially the royal ones) would provide. Especially since Cressida’s YOUNGER than Kate by a good seven years.

      I can just imagine all the shit I’d want to do if I was marrying Prince Harry–beyond making some ginger babies. My sperm donor is irish, so there was a good chance I could’ve gotten red hair 🙁 If I could change anything about myself, it’s that I would be born a ginger.

    • RobN says:

      Cressida has had plenty of time to be interested in charity but hasn’t shown any natural inclination to do much, outside, of course, the standard rich people buying a table at charity dinners thing. People are projecting a lot onto her because they’ve never heard her say anything.

  8. murphy says:

    This is just made up BS.

  9. Talie says:

    I think the “princess lessons” have zero to do with how to behave like a royal and more about public speaking. I highly doubt Cressida is any better at that. Neither of these women are true professionals who have probably ever had to give a presentation.

    • lunchcoma says:

      If those were the lessons Kate received, they should fire the teacher.

    • FLORC says:

      I think Cressida’s dance history makes her more comfortable infront of crowds. And she has better posture. So, i’m giving her a bit more credit as of now.

      And Princess training was more than just speeches. Gestures in public. Being hyper aware of yourself and surroundings. Protocol. Or that’s what we were given in statements here and there.

      • AmandaPanda says:

        Cressy may have better posture but I’m getting a strong sense of Waity’s best I’M REALLY INTERESTED IN THAT VERY IMPORTANT TJING YOU’RE SAYING RIGHT NOW face in that last pic of her and Harry

        I call vacuous. You heard it here first, kids.

      • FLORC says:

        I don’t really comment on your posts (because others beat me to it and i’d just be repeating), but you are on point with my thoughts!

        Poor Kate. She either looks like it’s torture for her to listen to other’s problems or she’s got a forced crazy smile that just doesn’t look natural. IMO she’s only looked natural when looking at William or scowling with Pippa.

        This will get interesting. Kate has set the bar so low that if she lessens the makeup or wear’s her hair pulled back we praise like she’s cured cancer.
        So, Cressida really only has to show up looking like she looks every day and it’ll be fine.
        Yea, I’m wearing my crabby pants today. What of it?

    • LadySlippers says:

      Princess lessons are probably way more boring that that. They are most likely the hierarchy and the protocol that goes with it (whom out ranks whom and why).

      Seriously insomnia cures kinda things.

    • bluhare says:

      I would bet the princess lessons are mainly protocol. And how to not piss off the Queen.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        It would be interesting to know who is giving these princess lessons in the house of Windsor. Do they actually mentor new brides or is it rather sink or swim? At least that was the impression I got from Diana.

      • bluhare says:

        My guess is it’s some high level employees, ArtHistorian. Word is that Kate watched films of how Diana got in and out of cars, handled photographers, etc.

      • Liberty says:

        A friend in the foreign service told me princess lessons also included “elude your followers” driving lessons!! in addition to how to address each sort of royal rank, allowed phrasing of comments, and etc.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        Thanks for the info.
        The driving lessons does sound interesting.

        I asked because I was reminded my a very nice quote by Queen Silvia about the late Queen Ingrid:
        “Queen Ingrid taught me the royal protocols, she taught me the rules by showing me how it should be and she showed great tenderness and care” ” For me Queen Ingrid was extremely meaningful. she was always there, and each time I visited Denmark she took good care of me”
        – Queen Silvia in the book: Drottning Silvia- en jubileumsbok.

        I always though that was a very nice gesture of her, mentoring Silvia and making sure that she was properly prepared for her new role. Granted, Silvia started as a queen, which is much more demanding.

    • LadySlippers says:


      The shade being thrown is fierce!!!!
      Especially the shade against William and Kate!

    • bluhare says:

      Wow. “They spend like plutocrats and look like victims”. Isn’t that the truth.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        And do not forget – yet another Marie Antoinette comparison (although it is indirect). That is NOT a good thing for the public image of any modern royal.

      • LadySlippers says:


        Very true. And The Guardian throws more weight than the DM.

        Though it pisses me off about the MA references — she wasn’t what people think she was. :-/

      • Bored suburbanhousewife says:

        Amen to that. Esp William.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        I know – the “let them eat cake is a myth” (first used to defame Anne of Austria, Queen Regent for the minor Louis XIV)

        However, she wasn’t innocent of excessive and conspicious consumption in a time of dire crisis (as well as living a the protected little bubble that was the court at Versailles) – that, however, was normal for her set. In that respect, there is certainly grounds for comparison with Willam Baldtop and Kate the Hungry.

        By the way,
        Have you read Antonia Fraser’s biography on Marie Antoinette? It is well-researched and well-written. And there is a surprisingly amount of documentation of very, very intimate aspects of her life. Fx exactly how it was that she and her husband couldn’t produce a child until her older brother paid a visit and explained the young French king EXACTLY how to go about the business of making an heir. Sometimes history is stranger than fiction.

      • LadySlippers says:

        I own the book my dear ArtHistorian.
        I don’t argue that she wasn’t a part of her circle but there were a lot of people that were ignorant as well but she got the blame because of her gender and who her parents were. That’s so not fair.

      • LAK says:

        ArtHistorian: I love that biography of MA and Antonia Fraser’s royal biographies in general.

        Another Queen for whom I never thought i’d have a modicum of sympathy is Catherine D’Medici. There is an excellent biography of her by Leonie Frieda which I recommend if you haven’t read it already and assuming you would be interested in her.

      • ArtHistorian says:


        I don’t know if it is allowed to be off-topic here, but I wanted to get back to you on something you asked in an earlier thread about the late Queen Ingrid. I haven’t been able to find any books on her in english, but I’ll put some links to a few obituraries on her death in 2000 (so you can get some basic info):






        And a bit on the Ruby and diamond parure that was known as “Ingrid’s rubies”:

      • ArtHistorian says:


        I love Leonie Frieda’s bio on Catherine de Medici – I’ve read it twice. That book really moves beyond the whole scary myth of Madame Serpent and gives an insight into just what it took to hold France together for 30 years, during several religious civil wars and ambitious nobles. She had her flaws (and horrible decisions) but she also had her virtues,


        I do agree.
        I would also recommend Fraser bio on Charles II, if you haven’t read that already.

      • wolfpup says:

        Art Historian, that tiara is stunningly beautiful, and all the women who are pictured wearing it look amazing, and as if it made them feel like a million dollars.

      • Liberty says:

        @ArtHistorian – I love that bio of Charles II. I need to reread it.

        Hey — do you remember the old superstition that a royal heir should not be named after a Charles, as it is considered an unlucky choice for a variety of reasons?

      • bluhare says:

        I’ve read that, Liberty. It was used as the reason for Charles thinking about being George VII instead of Charles III.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        I have heard about the superstition. Weird. Charles II was quite a successful monarch.

      • LAK says:

        Art Historian: It’s a twofold superstition.

        1. Those kings [charles, Richard, John] had very eventful and not necessarily comfortable rides as Kings. They have mostly ended/began in ignominy with the result that those Kings are viewed negatively.

        2. The other Kings, particularly Henry and George] have primarily had victorious and glorious reigns and are viewed positively.

        From a PR perspective, the BRF has always tried to wrap themselves in Kingly names of Kings that were viewed as successful and glorious. They hope that this gives them a positive PR to their reign by association.

        Charles is considering being George VI as King and not Charles III due to the negative connotations of that name for British Kings. His office has denied it, but the trial balloon was put out strongly a few years ago, so it will be interesting if he follows through.

      • LAK says:

        The Guardian doesn’t have more weight than the DM. The Guardian is a republican paper, bastion of all things labour. They instinctively disapprove of all things tory, royal and elitist [according to them]. The DM is the opposite of that. They are royalist, tory and bastion of all things conservative.

    • Violet says:

      @LAK- I adore that biography on Catherine de Medici. She was truly a woman ahead of her time (supportive of the arts, much better at governing a country than her husband and her sons) and while she did many questionable things during her regency and then under her three sons reigns (the St.Bartholome Day massacre was a disastrous decision in any way you see it), I don’t think she deserves to be called a she wolf and infamous figure when she did France a great well.

      • LadySlippers says:

        When lived in Japan there was a traveling exhibit from the Louvre which had several paintings depicting that massacre. 🙁
        The paintings were vivid enough to scare the heck outa my kids…

        I don’t know her that well but will look into some bios of her based on all your comments. So thanks for that.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        The Bartholow Massacre has been portrayed as a planned mass murder in the past. However, the original plan was to assassinate the Protesant leaders, and then the whole thing got out of control. Many of the murdered were Catholics – and it is not inconceivable that a lot of looting and robbery went on the guise of “cambatting Protestants). I think that she failed to recognize just how much Paris was a powder-keg with so many Protestants in town for the wedding of the Queen’s daughter Marguerite (Margot) to the Protestant king of Navarre, Henri de Bourbon (later Henri IV).

      • bluhare says:

        Who’d have thought that I’d be leaving a Harry/Cressida thread with so many good bio references? I’ve not read anything about Catherine De Medici and now I’m going to go get that book.

  10. Elle Kaye says:

    Cressida has a young Candice Bergen vibe.

  11. Andrea says:

    I don’t like Kate, but I don’t like Cressida either(something about her just makes me feel like she wouldn’t be a right fit either). I hope this is just another girlfriend for Harry.

    • A says:

      I don’t really understand why people are putting Cressida “above” Kate. Why, because her sister dated William? What is she, 25? Kate and Cressida were acting pretty much the same at 25. (And re:looks which some people seem to be going for, neither is “far above” the other… I think if you took a poll of people who didn’t know who either was they would be split pretty close to 50/50)

      • Tatjana says:

        The only difference I can see so far is that Kate is a bit prettier.

      • wolfpup says:

        I’d like to be “princessed-up” like Kate has been…top hair stylists, make-up artists, designers. I think that may be what makes Kate “a bit” prettier.

      • Tatjana says:

        Nope. I find Cressida plain at best.
        And Kate looked better in her university days than she does now, before the top hair and makeup. And in her uni days pictures, she looked like she had a personality. Cressida never looks like she has a personality.

  12. My2Pence says:

    Well, that’s one way to distract from the Maldives vacation, which will be followed in 1-2 weeks by the skiing trip: throw Harry and Cressida into the spotlight.

    • wolfpup says:

      Is the press really that controlled by the palace? That’s just wrong.

      • bluhare says:

        I think controlled is a strong word, but I think it’s more like “if you print that, there will be no more crumbs from the royal table” sort of attitude. And the papers want the crumbs, so they toe the line. Plus they get to be all noble when international media runs with the story and they can say “well, WE won’t print that!”

      • LadySlippers says:

        Actually bluhare I disagree. This is an American story so there’s no pull from anyone.

        We usually hear about it when the BRF is doing something about the press as it makes the papers — they are usually crying about it. And while some people do get little tidbits, it’s not like the Charles and Diana days when those two (and their camps) played the press off one another trying to out scoop another.

      • bluhare says:

        I was referring to the British press; I thought that was who we were talking about here as opposed to the article that’s the subject of this post. Oops.

      • LAK says:

        Bluhare and Wolfpup are talking about the British press.

  13. gaggles says:

    Every time I see her name I read it as Cressida bony-ass.

  14. Sandra says:

    When I first moved to London for Uni I worked for a catering company that did events all over the city. I worked at one at Coworth Park, a really nice hotel, and it was for a huge charity event bidding on art that went to one of the causes that Harry runs. He wasn’t the only royal there, William came but didn’t do anything.

    But Harry was amazing. He came into the back and thanked all the servers and chefs, he even went to the coat check staff with a plate of canapes. He gave a long speech and it was so beautiful, he didn’t have any notes or anything to look at, just spoke from the heart. After he spoke, he danced and hung out with all the people at the event, while William sulked and kept to a few people in the corner.

    He really has a way, and I think he is so so much better than William. Such a kind and wonderful person. I’d love to see him and Cressida show up Will and Kate forever.

    • LadySlippers says:

      A lot of people have said this about both William and Harry before. Very interesting.

    • bluhare says:

      And this is why my love for Harry continues unabated. Cressida had better treat him right.

    • FLORC says:

      I’ve heard similar stories.
      Yes, Harry is royal and yes he’s also a bit of an overprivilaged drain, but he seems honest in his actions and words. That’s why i’m cutting Cressida some slack on top of a grace period to get to see what the press does.

      William chose a likeminded wife and Harry, I think, has choosen a likeminded (future wife) gf.
      I have no doubt they will vacation, but also that they will work. I really hope Harry hasn’t settled for a persno who has no desire to help anyone, but herself.
      If only Kate worked a consistent few events a month I think a lot fewer of us would not care.

      And I agree Bluhare. Harry is a lovable scamp. She’d better be good to him. Too many out there wouldn’t mind forcing her out.

    • Liberty says:

      Great story!! a couple of friends in London have told me similar things from contacts via work. And two of my well-placed clients say Harry is the real deal. William, not so much. it is always a sort of head shake and “a too bad about that” comment re Wm over a pint. Harry has fun but strikes me as a worker and — sincere.

  15. Reece says:

    Tangentially speaking of Middleton game playing. Did anyone read the bit on DM about a painting of Pips being commissioned by her parents. She’s supposedly in a garden with the family dogs. The painter even said her parents should be entitled Earl and Countess of Bucklebury.
    My only thought was that that is so what’s gonna happen when Will is King.

    • CC says:

      They’ve been campaigning for that one for a while now.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        I can’t help thinking about the resented Wydeville family from the 15th century (daughter married to Edward IV) whenever I think about the Middleton’s.

      • bluhare says:

        Is the thinking sympathetic, ArtHistorian? I think I’m going to start calling you AH if that’s OK.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        Quite ok!

        I’m a bit on the fence regarding the Wydevilles. Their grasping ways may very well have been exaggerated, but I have no doubts that they were grasping and greedy – it was par for the course at the time.

        The Middleton family just gives me a bad vibe. Maybe because I find them lacking in class – and the way they, especially Kate’s siblings, court the media comes across as a modern form of grasping, perhaps not after titles or land, but after fame. Though they are not part of the BRF (other than through their daughter), their media-status as Z-list celebs does throw a shade over the RF’s public image. Otherwise, they wouldn’t be debated so vociferously on gossip sites!

      • bluhare says:

        LAK knows a lot about Richard III and the associated families, including the Woodvilles. I’m mostly an interested observer who’s read quite a bit. What’s your take on RIII? Probably too late for that now; I’ll try and remember for a future post.

    • LadySlippers says:

      I think the press makes up the titles crap.

      • Reece says:

        Probably, I don’t remember if it was in quotes or not and I’m too lazy to go look for it. Honestly, I really would not put it past Will to strong arm and whine his way to giving his FIL a title at some point. Just to make it so Kate will no longer have to curtsy to the extended family. I really wouldn’t.

        Re the article: I do remember the guy who did the write up was named Shakespeare which made me do a triple take and eye roll to the other side of my head.

      • LadySlippers says:


        Kate would have to curtsey to extended family based on The Order of Precedence that was changed in 2005 for Camilla & Charles’ marriage and would in no way be altered if Kate’s father gained a title.

        However, I *can* totally see Charles going back to the old Order of Precedence as King making Kate, as the new Duchess of Cornwall (England) and Duchess of Rothesay (Scotland) the 2nd lady of the land, after Camilla. Effectively bypassing his sister, nieces, and cousin. (Remember William has to be invested as PoW as it isn’t automatic and he’ll be D of Cornwall & D of Rothesay first).

        The titles thing is pure crap and titles for non-Royals (beyond life peerages) are something from the past. I think the press likes to stir up the social climbing fury because it’s ‘fun’ for them. And of course, it also sells papers.

      • bluhare says:

        I could have sworn Charles was using Prince of Wales before his investiture. Matter of fact, I thought Snowdon sort of came up with the ceremony. I should go look that up.

  16. Maggie says:

    Oh just wait until Harry marries her and they go on a vacation. The prigs will have a fest!

  17. aang says:

    The only thing that annoys me about this is her job. Its good she has one I guess but I’m sure she has it because of who she is. There have got to be dozens of qualified young people for whom that would a dream job. A first step to a real, life long career in theater management. Not just something to do while they wait to marry a prince.

    • Tatjana says:

      How does a dancer get a marrketing job?

    • Isadora says:

      What do you want her to do? Because that could probably said of any job she does, except cleaning toilets. And I think it’s actually good that she has a real job no matter how she got there. If I would have her family’s connections I would bless my good fortune and do the same. Who wouldn’t? And it’s a lot better than just partying and spending mommy’s and daddy’s money.

  18. GlimmerBunny says:

    She looks like Cara Delevigne, very beautiful. Cressida will look gorgeous at the wedding!

  19. Apples says:

    This is a little off topic:
    I really like Harry and I do think they are setting the wheels in motion for an engagement announcement within the year. But, I still have to wonder about that whole Las Vegas thing.

    The girl that came forward said that at 4am Harry took one of the girls at the party into his room and they didn’t come back out again. The reason those pics were supplied were as proof to the story and that she was actually there as a fellow partier and saw the whole thing go down. My issue with this is, Harry was already involved with Cressida at the time so, that makes me sad for her and the future of their marriage.

    • LadySlippers says:


      Several people stated that Harry was single during LV and during his deployment in Afghanistan (a big one being Richard Branson himself). They might have been very casually dating but not yet exclusive.

      The bigger thing is there hasn’t been a repeat of LV or any hint he’s cheated since it’s been confirmed that they’ve been dating. Even with Chelsy, there was an undercurrent of his partying and the possibility he might have cheated. Not true here. That says a lot.

      • fairy godmother says:

        Branson? Who would believe or take his word?
        I think he would lie to God himself if it would make him look good or benefit him.
        I think Harry was fooling around with her then went off to Vegas to do his own thing.
        She on the other hand was letting it be known she thought they really had something when the news broke.
        There was just a story out about Harry at a restaurant going over to flirt with two blondes. It was reported he started off by asking if they would like to share his “big sausage”. He was at their table flirting until the girls’ boyfriends showed up….whereby Harry quietly returned to his table, devoured his food, and left promptly. IMO I think there are lots of stories and rumours out there. I base mine on credibility. Branson is not one I would put in that category.

    • Dame Snarkweek says:

      There is a world of difference between Chels Harry and Cress Harry. He is more serioos, subdued and solicitous. He will not cheat on Cress until after she’s had their first child. Sad but overwhelmingly likely.

  20. CC says:

    Although I find the story is BS, how much contact do they really have if Kate is constantly holed up with her parents, shopping, or vacationing? Cressida hasn’t been made official in the sense of attending a lot of things Kate might be in, especially sans husband or Cressida’s SO to allow for a lot of girl-“bonding” and private conversations. Especially if, as noted, Cressida has Royals as friends. If anything, her friends are the ones advising her. They know their cousin is bound to marry someone, might as well be someone they like.

    Whatever, just seems a narrative to try to assert Waity as the alpha-female in the narrative. She already is by default, she’s married to the heir. It would take a lot of effort on Cressida’s part to be super-busy with charities and public life for it to be otherwise. And at some point, Cressida would always have to bow to Waity regardless.

    • bluhare says:

      I tend to agree with this.

    • bluhare says:

      I read the article in the check out line today. I purposefully got in a long line so I could read it. The one thing that I took away from this? That Cressida likes Carole Middleton. WTF????

  21. Sixer says:

    OT a bit but a titbit from the hacking trial involving Diana for you guys:


    • LadySlippers says:

      Interesting Sixer….

      And ‘titbit’? Is that the British version of tidbit or is my lovely Sixer letting out another Fruedian slip of the finger???! Oh Dearie that garden bench now has your petals strewn on it waiting for you….


      *kiss kiss hug*

      • Sixer says:

        I think it’s titbit everywhere except for stateside, where it’s tidbit.

        OBVIOUSLY, I prefer titbit. It’s ruder!

    • LAK says:

      Sixer: that makes me so angry. That she would compromise security like that simply to score points against Charles.

      • LadySlippers says:

        Agreed. I was being light because my honest response was anger. I can forgive a lot of sh*t from people (and people get mad at me bc of it) but this was LOW. And Diana and Charles really plumbed the depths of low but this IMO is really low.

        The Guardian had an even worse spin on it.


      • Sixer says:

        I just caught it on TV news and thought of you guys. That was the first link in Google. I would credit the guy’s evidence – what’s the point of lying now? Even if we believe he got from Diana rather than paying the police, he’s really got nothing left to lose.

    • Dame Snarkweek says:


      • LadySlippers says:

        The British spend a lot of money on the security of the BRF and the unlisted numbers it part of that protection. So Diana compromised the safety of the Royal Household numbers and quite possibly their cell phones too (apparently the cell phone part is debatable). Not cool.

        There’s a good reason we can’t just call up anyone.

      • LAK says:

        Dame: what Lady slippers said.

        There are many anonymous people working for the family, not simply the official household, whose numbers would have been blithely handed over which is a short step to tracing them and bugging/hacking them for whatever reason and passing on or publishing sensitive information.

        And that’s before you take into consideration the stalkers

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        LAK, Lady
        Ok it makes sense now. I thought it was just the numbers/extensions of butlers, valets, equirys, chauffeurs etc. but I see now it was the whole kit and caboodle. Wow!

      • Archaeologist says:

        Except the numbers were never actually ‘handed out’ so this is really just a huge fuss over nothing some 20 years ago. The papers need something to keep the royal fanatics reading, in that sense this old news has been very successful. The media makes millions catering to royal obsessives, and they always take the bait.

      • LadySlippers says:

        @Archaeologist: Please explain as I’m genuinely curious.

      • Sixer says:

        @archaeologist – I don’t think the papers can direct the evidence given in a criminal trial.

      • LAK says:

        Archaeologist: what sixer said.

        this particular gentleman is already in jail for phone hacking. He is simply giving additional information to the hacking trial of different defendants. One of the accusations was that he had obtained this sensitive directory which he may or may not have passed onto the defendants by bribing police and his rebuttal is that it came from Diana, not the police and money didn’t change hands to acquire it.

  22. anne_000 says:

    ““Kate’s been brilliant with Cressida and has been giving her advice,” they say. “She likes her very much and has offered her tips on how to keep her normality.”

    “How to keep her normality?”

    It’s like getting advice from someone who is an expert at playing hookey. I don’t see that as a good thing.

  23. MissNostalgia says:

    I like her; she is fresh faced and natural. What is Kate going to advise her on??? How to apply black eyeliner? Pulease!

  24. Alin says:

    likely bs… who knows.
    I remember Cressida doing charity (marathon with Bea, they were all sporty in green;-) and it´s good to see people having real fun in such charitable projects. Not just attending stiff galas. So when it comes to charity Cressida could surprise us all if she marries Harry.

    Cressida´s style is ok, very comfortable, but damn when this girl dresses up she looks so good!

    If she marries Harry then she will ditch the boho chic and dress up for official engagements and i think it is possible that Cressida will outrank Kate in the beauty and style departement very easy. Kate is pretty, but she total needs all her expensive styling help…and still her make-up is a mess and does her no favours 🙁
    Cressida with her natural hair and fresh face has something… a spark

  25. Jaded says:

    What’s she been giving her advice on? How to avoid working? How to shirk royal duties?

  26. AmandaPanda says:

    And in other news


    Was just driving home & was rudely interrupted by a convoy of 5 police cars w flashing lights sandwiching 2 town cars w blacked out windows. (That’s how all of us “normal folk” beat the London traffic, dontchaknow?) All of which turned into KP.

    Stand by for kensington garden pap shots in 5,4,3,2,1….

    • LadySlippers says:

      OMG AmandaPanda!!!’

      You were in the company* of the great and mighty Cambridge’s! Does the world look different now?!????


      *Obviously playing a bit loose with this.

      • AmandaPanda says:

        Sadly I can’t seem to escape them. Guess that comes from living down the road. Have seen Kate a few times on the shopping/Starbucks runs. She looks totally different from the girl i sat next to at dinner parties (well, 2 or 3 of them) 10 years ago.

        (In another revelation that i mnow will titillate you ladies, the ginge prince hit on me way back in the day when we used to go to boujis. He was sweaty and gross & his friends were sleeeeazy. I declined (and later saw him costing up to a young blonde pair of twins – such an honour!). )

        And of course the flashing lights are new. Obviously they are very busy important people so I can see why speed is of the essence.

    • Dame Snarkweek says:

      Police cars sandwiching a towncar with blacked out windows?
      As if Kate would be anywhere near a sandwich!

  27. aquarius64 says:

    Please stop making “Hessy” happen. This looks like the Palace is pushing Harry to marry the girl because he hit the 30-year mark, just like Charles and William. The campaign to sell her as a proper prospective royal is nauseating. As for titles – the queen hands them out upon marriage. Who says Cressy will automatically become a duchess? When Edward and Sophie married they became the Earl and Countess of Wessex. And if blue-blood becomes a duchess, so what? She won’t be Kate’s equal. Kate will become queen consort, and Cressy will still have to walk behind her and drop they curtsy to Kate.

    • bluhare says:

      If they marry she will become a duchess unless Harry declines the dukedom that will almost certainly be offered.

    • LAK says:

      Edward will be DoE when the current one dies, so he doesn’t care being called an Earl for now.

    • LadySlippers says:


      This article is pretty much BS so I’d disregard it entirely.

      And like others have stated the Wessex title for Edward was because he asked for it. It shocked people as Wessex and an earldom wasn’t expected at all.

  28. RobN says:

    It’s disappointing that this automatically has to turn into a case of one woman against the other, people taking sides on who’s prettier or who has better taste.

    Why is it so outrageous that these two might get along like normal women do? I mean other than the fact that that is no fun for the rest of us?

  29. Silly says:

    Agree totally with this article, cress is light years ahead of waity. Also the normal life thing sounds right with Harry . He does work with the most vunerable more than his brother ( charity , warrior games etc. ) . And he could lead a very normal life with cress especially when George comes of age. It’s important he set himself apart now so he isn’t useless when he’s older. Great thinking. Now if only he could tell Will you can’t have it like me start representing.