The Cambridges are taking another week off from public duties

Royal Garden Party

Remember my confusion about how and why the Duchess of Cambridge seemingly took a month off around Easter? My confusion was because I don’t understand all of the holiday-schedule stuff with the British school system. American school systems are pretty straight forward – two weeks around Christmas, a week around Easter and then about two months off for the summer holiday. Sure, there might be one or two days off here and there, but the only time kids get a full week or two off is for Christmas and Easter. British schools are different. There are summer breaks and half-term breaks and bank holiday breaks and holiday breaks and more. Anyway, that’s probably why Kate recently had a month “off” from public duties – the Cambridge kids were off, and she spent the time with the kids in Norfolk. It also worked out that Kate and Will basically went dark for several weeks as the Rose Hanbury rumors heated up and then got swiftly slapped down by Will’s lawyers. Anyway, another holiday break is upon us, I guess.

The half-term holidays have finally arrived and parents up and down the country are whisking their kids off for a week-long getaway. And it seems the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are no different, after it’s been reported that the royals are taking their three children to the family’s Sandringham Estate for the holidays.

According to the Mirror, the Cambridges are likely to be spending the half-term break at their Sandringham Estate on the Norfolk coast. The 10-bedroom mansion – Amner Hall – was gifted to Kate and William by the Queen after their wedding in 2011.

[From The Sun]

While this isn’t really gossip, I’d just like to point out a few things all at once. First off, I consider it growth that William and Kate don’t pop out for endless trips to Ibiza and Swiss chalets these days. Traveling with three kids isn’t much of a vacation, and I think Kate simply prefers these days to just be at Anmer, where everything is familiar. Second thing I’d like to point out… the Rose Hanbury situation is probably still a point of conversation for the Turnip Toffs, don’t you think? William shut down the newspapers, but he could never shut down the aristos gossiping with each other. And now everyone in Norfolk knows his business. I wonder what that’s like for Kate, having her entire circle of “country friends” knowing about Willy’s wandering sceptre. Last thing: another “week off” but they are the future king and queen!

The Duke And Duchess Of Cambridge Attend Gala Dinner To Support East Anglia's Children's Hospices' Nook Appeal

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

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

199 Responses to “The Cambridges are taking another week off from public duties”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. snazzy says:

    “Willy’s wandering sceptre” – I’m dying!!

  2. BayTampaBay says:

    The affair story will never die. It may take a year or more but more info will come out.

    • Megan says:

      BayTampaBay, you are racking up a huge karma debt.

      • lawyergal says:

        @megan, what does that mean? I hope you’re not implying something along the lines of baytampabay getting bad karma for posting an innocuous comment on a celebrity gossip site about a public figure whose scepter really is quite wandering, because that seems like you yourself would be racking up a massive karmic debt since you’re directly referring to a poster rather than commenting generally on a public figure.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        I know BUT I was not the one involved in the affair. LOL! LOL! Also, if all we have read is true, Kate did not handle this problem very smartly.

        I think Rose is the one having the last laugh as she is not the type of person you can “phase-out”. I have nothing to base this next comment on except my gut instinct but I get the felling that the “Turnip Toffs” prefer Rose and her husband to Bill & Cathy. If anyone is getting “phased-out” of this Norfolk set it is Cathy. She will be queen consort and that counts for something but Cathy probably is no longer part of the inner circle. I really need to quit reading Edwardian biographies and history books.

      • Megan says:

        @lawyergal – you see the irony in your post, right?

      • Maria says:

        Lol hi Megan (I’m assuming it’s the same Megan, correct me if I’m wrong). The site wouldn’t allow me to post a reply to your comment about Jecca on a recent post for some reason so here I am just as a followup (we were talking about Will missing Prince George’s first vacation to go hunting with a bunch of men and Jecca) –
        William has always carried a torch for Jecca, his interest in Africa and conservancy stems from his involvement with her, they spent loads of time together and had their ‘pretend’ engagement, he completely ignored his then-girlfriend Kate to sit next to Jecca at his own huge 21st birthday party, he would frequently confide in her about his emotional pain from the loss of Diana which Kate would get upset about and leak stories about – they were involved but not as deeply as Will would have liked because Jecca didn’t want to give up her privacy or career for him (same with Isabella Calthorpe Branson). She remains the only girl he has ever issued a public statement about – to protect her reputation and privacy.
        Look up pictures of Kate in the early dating years. She is much sportier, wearing similar cowboy/safari hats and shawls that were a hallmark of Jecca’s style.

        There’s no ‘karmic debt’, if William doesn’t want people talking about him cheating on his wife he could always, you know, not cheat.

      • Megan says:

        @Maria – you need better hobbies.

      • Maria says:

        Megan – I have quite a few, thanks! I’ve just actually chosen to only comment on things I’ve been paying attention to for years.

      • Megan says:

        In that case, you definitely need better hobbies.

      • Maria says:

        You’re here commenting the same as the rest of us, so really, you are no better. Thanks though!

      • Megan says:

        @Maria – I encourage you to reread your posts.

      • Maria says:

        For what reason? First comment was just a polite followup about a man who is in the public eye and is publicly funded, so his actions are visible.
        I’m not threatening other posters with karmic retribution or insulting them. We’re all here to discuss.

      • Megan says:

        @Maria – Fortunately BayTampaBay understands humor.

      • Cherie says:

        Perhaps the karma comment refers to the complete lack of regard for the woman in this story (women if we count Jecca who gets shoehorned in whenever possible). In the desperation to keep this alive out of dislike for William, it is always ignored that this woman has a family and young children, but hey, the families should never get in the way of good gossip.

      • vava says:

        What happened to the link here on Celebitchy where posts attacking other posters could be forwarded to the moderators? (Megan, you are out of line.)

      • Megan says:

        Am I the only one who had been following BayTampaBay’s comments for the past several weeks? I was making a joke because, she/he/they, have been making self deprecating jokes about Rose for weeks.

      • vava says:

        I don’t see the humor in your attacks against Maria. That’s all.

      • Maria says:

        Cherie- referring to Jecca being part of the hunting trip has nothing to do with her now husband. It’s stating a fact. The contextual background regarding her involvement with William is also a fact. And another fact is that William’s behavior is on him not on her. I think we are all adult enough to understand that.
        As far as Rose – no one said anything about her children, and the Norfolk aristos are not letting anything touch her – that is the point of these discussions.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Ladies & Gentlemen & Others,

        I was not insulted by Megan’s comment as we have followed each other for ages and also it is widely known that I am un-offend-able. However, a newbie who is not use to the writing style of us regulars might have got hurt feelings so we all need to careful when replying to someone we do not not usually debate with.

        I myself am up for a good debate at anytime.

      • Megan says:

        @Vava – I didn’t see the point in Maria coming after me with an comment apropos of nothing. I don’t see deflecting as attacking. We’ll just agree to disagree.

      • Cherie says:

        @Maria. We all know the point of bringing up Jecca, just as we all know the point of bringing up Rose in every story regardless of the content of the post.
        I realize it is a gossip site and I read this one several times a day, eventually it has become a bit gross for me to be hoping for some explosive evidence to justify my thirst for gossip. These are real people.

        Having said that I will call my own hypocrisy because if it happens I’ll be checking by the minute for updates.

      • Maria says:

        Megan – I never “came after you”, I was following up with a previous comment that I figured you would be interested in. Then you got insulting. Chill out.

      • notasugarhere says:

        vava, unfortunately that option disappeared a long time ago. No coincidence there’s a rise in posters like Megan who spend their time policing and attacking other posters.

      • lawyergal says:

        @Maria, I’m with you here. I’ve been reading the comments for nearly a decade here (just started posting this year) but I think I’m going to step back. I think what I really enjoyed were the posts from LAK, Sixer, and the old posters who left once the site became more mainstream. The name of the blog is celebitchy, after all.

        @notasugarhere, I am a complete fan of yours!!! Please never change.

      • Bella DuPont says:

        @ Megan

        Am I wrong to be thoroughly enjoying the remorseless bitchiness of your comments right now? 😁😁

      • Maria says:

        Other Maria here. I don’t think you have to worry about Nota ever changing. She is who she is, And she is never boring.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Nota, Are you from the UK?

      • Nestea says:

        Nota- I truly miss the old time regulars. Back when these boards were fun, where we disagreed but still found the humour in each other. Remember those Kstew days of 2009/10/11 and OMG, 2012? Sigh. Good times.

      • Sandy says:

        Um Megan, yea, POSITIVE karma for not letting that wandering willy have it all his way.

        You seem reeaaaallly personally offended by that statement. What’s that about?

      • Megan says:

        @Sandy – BayTampaBay has been posting humorous, self-admonishing comments about Rose for weeks. My comment was meant in jest and was taken in jest. May I suggest you follow BTB more closely, her/his/their comments are quite witty and fun.

      • Skwinkee says:

        “I think Rose is the one having the last laugh as she is not the type of person you can “phase-out”. I have nothing to base this next comment on except my gut instinct but I get the felling that the “Turnip Toffs” prefer Rose and her husband to Bill & Cathy. If anyone is getting “phased-out” of this Norfolk set it is Cathy. She will be queen consort and that counts for something but Cathy probably is no longer part of the inner circle. I really need to quit reading”

        This is very true! In British class levels the royals are a bit-meh. We see them(as North American’s) with much more social importance. But the house Windsor is a bit “new money/gauche” compared to some of these seats that have been peers of the realm for centuries.

    • Citresse says:

      Yes please

    • L84Tea says:

      @BayTampaBay, absolutely. That story is going to be mentioned a decade from now, and the one after that.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        I have no trouble taking about this Rose Bush story or the individuals involved: Kate, William, Rose, David, anonymous Turnip Toff #3, and what or whom else may come out. However, the problem I have is when trolls make up ludicrous stories like Rose’s daughter is William’s child or Prince Charles is not Harry’s father.

        That is hurtful and that is what I call “bringing the children in” which should not be tolerated and is not tolerated on this site by CB. I hang out at this site because the level if civility and class is about as high as it gets for a gossip site.

        If you want to read the super nasty made-up stuff and/or super exaggerated supposed insider comments go the DataLounge. I think the staff of BP and KP may post at this site.

      • L84Tea says:

        A coworker of mine believes 100% that Harry is not Charles’ son. It’s so ridiculous.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @L84Tea, LOL! Forget that the dates do not jive, Harry is the spitting image of Prince Phillip only with red hair and the Spencer complexion.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @L84Tea, LOL! Forget that the dates do not jive, Harry is the spitting image of Prince Phillip only with red hair and the Spencer complexion.

      • notasugarhere says:

        It doesn’t help Diana had that affair, two years after Harry arrived, with a man who looked like her father. Serious daddy issues.

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        When growing up I always thought Harry was the spit of Charles Spencer, Diana’s brother – the red hair comes from her side of the family.

      • Mego says:

        Another conspiracy theory is that Diana was not Johnny Spencer’s biological child but Francis and James Goldsmith’s lovechild. Look at pics of Diana alongside other Goldsmith children. It’s interesting.

      • olive says:

        i love the royals but i just cannot get into this rose hanbury story. even william’s affairs are dull!

        @Mego very interesting – i always thought diana looked differently from her siblings. the comparison shots of diana/william/zac goldsmith are convincing.

      • Lady D says:

        LMAO at “even William’s affairs are dull.”

      • Redgrl says:

        @mego – i had read that too. Diana and Jemima Khan (nee Goldsmith) had an eerie resemblance..

      • Olenna says:

        Regarding the Goldsmith similarities, I don’t recall this ever being discussed on here on CB, but the rumor always interested me. I do think Diana and Zac G. favor each other more so than they do Jemima.

      • twoz says:

        @Mego, the only problem I have with that theory is that Johnnie and Frances Spencer were still trying for the heir (Diana’s elder brother, who would have been the heir, died the day he was born).
        Otherwise, if it’s the case – good for Frances.

    • aaa says:

      The story will not die, just like the stories have not died that Prince Philip is not Andrew’s father, Charles is not Harry’s father or that Diana’s death was orchestrated by MI5. Yeah maybe in the future there will be a smoking gun to go along with the murmurings and wishful thinking, a la the Charles and Camilla tapes, but from what I’ve seen thus far, there’s not a lot of there there.

      • Some chick says:

        [raises hand]

        I’m a Diana’s death/MI 5 truther. Because there are supposed to be cameras in those tunnels and that *one* was “not working.” And also because of the disappearing car. The story just does not quite stack up.

        Causing a car accident and then getting away is hardly James Bond level ish.

        I know, hardly anyone else believes this now. (I heard it mentioned a lot BITD tho.) But I just can’t help it. I think she was seen as inconvenient and too powerful. They couldn’t tell her what to do any more…

      • Nic919 says:

        No one forced Diana not to wear a seatbelt. Had there been evidence of a missing seatbelt I might buy this, but I have handled too many cases where serious injuries can happen when people don’t wear seatbelts even in low speed collisions. Buckle up folks!

      • Tina says:

        If MI5 wanted to kill Diana (which, let’s be clear, they did not) it would have been a lot easier for them to do it inside the UK than outside of it.

      • Lorne Borne says:

        The death of Diana was VERY convenient. Just look how much sympathy the monarchy gained afterwards and how masterfully the monarchy exploited the situation:

        – 1. death of Diana
        – 2. mourning of the public, even the Queen acknowledges that by visiting those flowers at Buckingham Palace
        – 3. lots of sympathy for Diana’s sons
        – 4. sympathy extends to Charles and the Queen especially after the former presents himself as a loving father (skiing pics in black/white)
        – 5. Diana’s sons still demand that sympathy from the public

        I don’t think that Diana would have wanted to help the Queen and Prince Charles gain sympathy by her after her death.

      • Some chick says:

        People riding in limos frequently ignore seatbelts. The fact that she wasn’t wearing a seatbelt has no real bearing on whether the crash was purposefully caused.

        Perhaps they knew that to be her practice; perhaps not. I haven’t read that a seatbelt would have saved her.

        As Lorne says, it was all just so awfully convenient.

      • Hyacinth Bucket says:

        Her death REALLY wasn’t “convenient.” The death turned her from a trashy famewhore hooking up with married men and foreign playboys, into a martyr. Her rep here in Britain before her death was very bad, dying basically turned her into a saint.

        Plus death turned her relationship with Dodi (which by all accounts was very casual and she was using him to make another man jealous) into some kind of Romeo and Juliet story, which gave his criminal dad (who my family used to work for; he’s incredibly dodgy) a weapon and agenda against the RF. Why would you plot to turn a powerful criminal who already hated you and was a thorn in your side against you even more, and give them such a powerful weapon against you? (By weapon I mean the conspiracy theory that the RF killed his son.) If they’d wanted to kill her, waiting for the affair to blow over or just killing her alone would be far more sensible.

        And her death and the RF reaction to her death almost destroyed them. Remember the massive national outcry because the Queen refused to lower flags to half mast and refused to leave Scotland or engage with any public mourning? That’s the only time in my life I’ve seen mass public anger directed at the Queen herself. Obviously she was correct in choosing to put comforting William and Harry above public mourning, but it was a huge PR misstep and caused a huge amount of ill will.

        The fact the RF were so completely caught off guard by the death to me proves they had no involvement.

  3. aquarius64 says:

    The cheating story is still trending on Twitter. If Rose and Hubby are not at the state banquet next week it fuels the rumors.

    • Becks1 says:

      It was on the cover of a US tabloid this week (Star maybe?) I ran into a local grocery store for dinner last night and saw it (all about how Kate has moved in with her mom etc) and thought of this site immediately.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      @aquarius64, You are so correct! The Marquess & Marchioness of Cholmondeley will be at the banquet if his hereditary position at court requires his attendance. His attendance will help squelch any further rumors.

      If his hereditary position at court does not require his attendance, then this is not the type of thing he would be invited per protocol as he is not part of the Government, Diplomatic corp or State Department to my understanding and I am sure he really does not want to go to a Chump dinner.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      Yes I was wondering if it would come up again in the next few weeks due to them both being required to attend the US state banquet giving his title and connections to the royal household. Am sure the press will be all over Rose the day after. We might even get photos.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Battle of the evening gowns & tiara’s?

        YES! I am up for it as I love good dinner party warfare.

      • notasugarhere says:

        We get few photos from inside these events. Most are blurry screencaps from the few allowed videos. Those handling the filming this time around may be ordered not to film Rose and her husband, to keep those screencaps from showing up on social media.

      • Megan says:

        I think they should ban all photographers. It is unfair to have documentary proof of being in the same room as Trump because duty and responsibility demanded you attend.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Megan, I hope “they” erase all proof that the dinner even took place.

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        i suspect that we might get more press over this one, as the Orange turd will want as much attention from it as possible given how much of a braggart and showoff he and his crotch goblins are.

      • Algernon says:

        I hope we do get photos if the Cholmondeleys go to the banquet, they have a fabulous family tiara that I would like a better look at.

      • Megan says:

        @Digital Unicorn – “crotch goblins” is hilarious. I cannot stop laughing!

      • PrincessK says:

        Well l am surprised that new pictures of Rose have not emerged yet. There have been various events taking place at Houghton Hall and l expected Rose to put in an appearance. It’s either than she did and the pro Cambridge media are keeping a distance or that Rose is keeping a low profile. But a recent picture is sure to emerge sooner or later.

  4. 10KTurtle says:

    Ugh, I can never un-see the crooked buttons on that pink coat.

    • Deedee says:

      I’d hide away for more than a week after wasting money on that poor design.

  5. MissyS. says:

    Of course they need a break. Those garden parties and photo shoots are such hard work! 😂

    • Flying fish says:

      I thought the same thing.
      Kate and William are two useless and lazy people.

      • aang says:

        I agree about William. He needs to be working more. As for Kate, making the choice to be a full time parent does not mean one is lazy. As far as I am concerned her job is to give birth to, then raise an heir and a spare. She seems to be doing a good job. And so what if she has nannies. When it’s any other famous woman everyone piles on to say “I’d have help if I could afford it” or “No nanny shaming here”. Being the future King is William’s job. Kate can work more when the kids are older. The Kate hate seems to be a subtle form of stay at home mom shade. Raising kids IS work.

      • Becks1 says:

        @aang – nah. Kate got criticized for not working before they had kids. She just doesn’t want to work. I’m sure right now she prefers staying home with them, but she wasn’t working that much before she had them, and she didn’t really work that much before she married William.

        Criticizing her work ethic is not a criticism against SAHMs. not at all.

      • Meganbot2000 says:

        I have no problem with Kate deciding to be a SAHM (though I question whether someone with multiple nannies can really be a SAHM). It’s the fact she gets so much publicity for her “work” and her much-reported “keenness” that doesn’t materalise. Eg the initiative mentioned below which was supposed to be launched in the new year, ie January 2019. If Kate was honest and said she intended to not work in order to raise her kids, fine. But don’t announce your intention to work, announce grand plans, enjoy all the attention and positive PR, then have those announcements not come to anything. It’s hypocritical. If Kate wanted to live outside of the spotlight and be a SAHM she could, but she obviously doesn’t want that.

      • Flying fish says:

        Raising kids is work. My mother had four kids and worked full time.
        Kate is lazy and has been so from the start, she is now using her kids as an excuse not to work. She is not the Queen, yet, but she happy takes advantage of the perks yet does so little.
        William, the same.

      • notasugarhere says:

        All the other royals worked more when they had young children, but excuses are constantly made for this lazy duo by their fans.

        For the millionth time. W&K live off the taxpayers for everything, yes the Duchy belongs to the taxpayers. If they want to go buy their own home, pay for all of their security, and pay for their fleet of housekeepers, cooks, cleaners, and nannies themselves? They’re welcome not to work. But no, they do not get to play the “we’re normal, we’re stay at home parents” while living off other peoples money.

      • Moneypenny says:

        Kate is not a SAHM mom. She has a job. You’re saying that William is the only one with a job and that is wrong. Everyone else in the family (born in or married in) understands this responsibility. It is part of the deal in exchange for living off tax payers.

        SAHM get all the credit in the world from me. I couldn’t do it. Kate seems like a wonderful mother–just not a SAHM.

      • PrincessK says:

        Looking after small children is harder than working in a busy office. I have done both, l always looked forward to going back to work after having children.

        Being the centre of attention only for a few hours at a time can be soul destroying, and knowing that even when you are at home privately the whole world is gossiping about what you wear, what you look like and the state of your marriage. No amount of money can compensate for that or make you feel like breaking down mentally. So l don’t begrudge all the perks they get. Also they do work behind the scenes, organizing servants is a full time job, l know.

        They may be royal, rich and privileged but they are humans too.

      • Maria says:

        PrincessK- their wealth and privilege mean they can isolate themselves from those who are gossiping about them. And they isolate themselves utilizing taxpayer money.
        Their presence is not supposed to be the center of attention at public functions (not royal ones). Their presence is supposed to bring attention to the causes they claim to want to further.
        How many nannies do they have again? Sufficient help that they don’t need to burden themselves with the grunt work of raising children.
        They aren’t servants, they are staff, they are human beings too.

      • Nic919 says:

        So are we saying that Sophie is a crap mom for doing at least double the engagements than Kate even with young kids? Sophie will never be future future Queen consort so it really says a lot that she does her duty with regard to engagements with no future reward of being queen consort.

        Because that’s what being a member of the royal family actually means. Duty and service. Anyone from the UK knows this. Otherwise there is no point to a hereditary BRF. They may as well get people interested and qualified for the job.

    • Lunde says:

      Meh – parents take time off for school holidays – shocker!

      • Melissa says:

        Unfortunately, lots of working parents don’t have the privilege of taking days, weeks, or months off for school vacations. Most companies only allow employees a small amount of time off per year.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Parents with a fleet of home help paid by taxpayers once again use their children as an excuse not to work an hour a week.

    • Call_Me_Al says:

      I do want to throw my hat in the ring on this one. I really don’t like W & K. However, Kate is in a double-bind because mothers (even QE) are criticized for being cold and distant when they spend lots of time away from their children as well as for staying home and nurturing them. I am going to stop tearing her down for her work decisions.

  6. Kim says:

    Lots of people take vacations this time of year, I don’t see the big deal. I would do the same if in their position, especially with so many young children.
    Sure they are “senior royals” but they are not actually King and Queen yet, or even the next in line. Plus, for all of their privileges, It’s not like they get to “retire” someday. The Queen is 94 and still always out and about, and Prince Philip is almost 100 and only gave up official duties recently.

    • Beach Dreams says:

      LOL okay. Let’s stop acting like these two go through the daily 9-5 grind and don’t have a ton of staff to help with their “many young children” 🙄

      • Kim says:

        I never said they worked the 9-5 “daily grind” – just that they will probably never retire and be on public display forever. A few extra vacations (IMO) isn’t a big deal considering all that.

    • notasugarhere says:

      All the other royals worked more when they had young children. W&K, third couple in the land, are taking the perks and using their kids as excuses not to work.

    • Lady D says:

      I can see William retiring and handing the crown to George. He’s lazy and is probably already planning on not following in granny’s footsteps. Maybe he’ll surprise me.

  7. Ader says:

    Growing up (and I’m from the states), we got off two weeks at the end of the year, one week in February, one week in April, 2.5 months for summer break — and we also got off for all the major Jewish holidays. In other words, school schedules vary greatly in the U.S.

    • Becks1 says:

      you mean you got two weeks off in May, before the summer break? that’s amazing.

      I went to private school so our schedule had a bit more flexibility, but it was still pretty standard – start the week before labor day, two days off for thanksgiving, usually 6-7 days off around Christmas (so usually two full weeks, but not that many school days), a few religious holidays here and there (catholic school), and then 6 or 7 days off at Easter and we ended the first week of June.

      My current kids school is stingy with the official breaks since we have a lot of snow days built in, so they only have two days off for spring break. I’ll admit, that stretch from presidents day to easter can be really long.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Becks1, Grew up in the Midwest and we got a week either before or after Easter (it differed each year based on when Easter fell) which was called Spring Break. If we had a lot of snow days (more than 5 as 5 were built into the school calendar) then we had to make them up at Spring break.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Bay – our school district (not the one I grew up in) used to be similar, but we have a lot of professional days built in, and then we have a mandate that we have to start after labor day and be done by June 15, so its a much tighter schedule now, which is super annoying, because like I said, that late winter/early spring stretch is looooong, for students and teachers.

      • Ader says:

        I meant December as “end of year.” Didn’t say, “for Christmas,” because not everyone celebrates Christmas, and it was drilled into our heads that it was “end of year break.”

    • The Dot says:

      I went to a mix of public and private schools here in the US. The public school did what they called “year-round schooling” which just meant the summer break was slightly shorter, we got a two week fall break, two weeks at Christmas, two weeks for April/spring break, and then around two months in the summer. All the schools in my district, and I think the state, followed this model. So yes, schools do vary. Easter break is not unheard of here.

    • MrsBanjo says:

      Are you on the east coast? Because that’s the only area where I’ve heard about that much time off – especially the Jewish holidays. I was so surprised when a friend from Philadelphia (I’m in California) told me that those holidays got off because I had never heard that. But then she told me the history and it made sense.

      It really does vary throughout the country, though. My kids get 2 months in the summer, a week for Thanksgiving, two weeks for winter, and a week for spring.

      • aang says:

        I live in a suburb in NY with a lot of Jewish students, our schools are off for the Jewish holy days.

      • Amelie says:

        We got Jewish holidays off too in the district I was raised (but I only attended public school for two years for 11th and 12th grade so those are the only years I got them off). However for most of my schooling from K-8th grade I attended a French-American school and we followed the French calendar for school vacations (so no Jewish holidays). One week off in October, two weeks off for Christmas, one week off in February, and two weeks off in April. And we got all the American federal/bank holidays. The French education system has vacation every 6 weeks so my school (which was recognized as a French school by the French Ministry of Educatin) adopted the same model. That ended when I left the school and boy did I miss it haha (I went to two different American high schools, one private and one public. I got more vacation at the private high school than the public one).

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Amelie, What do you think of the French education system compared to the education systems of The USA and England-Wales?

      • Lady D says:

        Why are they called bank holidays? In Canada we get statutory holidays, which I assume are the same. You get to stay home and get paid for it, right? Why the use of the word bank?

      • PrincessK says:

        @Lady D…It is a term that was used in the 19th for certain religious days when people were not allowed to do financial transactions. Google for more extensive info about it.

      • Amelie says:

        @TampaBay I can’t compare England or Wales education system as I have no personal experience with it. I could write a lot of what I think of the American vs. French education system which I’m not going to do here. Here is an anecdotal example though: when I was in kindergarten, my mom (who is American) went to her first parent-teacher conference at the French-American school. The French teacher honed in on the fact that I apparently was having trouble with scissors and cutting and said something to the effect of “Amelie, it’s not going well with the scissors!” My mom was freaked out and wondering if something was wrong with her daughter and just all around just really taken aback by the criticism of my cutting skills.

        Then my mom went down the hall to talk to the American teacher. The American teacher went on and on about how I loved music and singing and while I was a bit shy, I was learning how to write and hold a pencil properly and all around was doing well in class.

        This experience showed my mom the stark contrast between the American and French attitudes when it comes to teaching: French teachers will tell you all about what your kid is doing wrong and will come across as negative. American teachers will start off with the things your kid enjoys/is doing well and notes what can be improved but in a positive way.

      • Lady D says:

        Thank you, PrincessK. I thought about googling it but was thinking it was a slang word for something else.

      • CairinaCat says:

        I’m in Southern California. My kid goes to a year round public school.
        He starts August 22, has 3 weeks off in October. Gets a week at Thanksgiving, gets 2 weeks off at Christmas, gets 2 weeks off for spring break, last day of school is June 6th
        Plus all the holiday 3-4 day weekends

    • Ali says:

      Agree that the US public school holiday schedule isn’t uniform.

      In CA, my kids had a week off at Thanksgiving, three off in December/Jan and one for spring break sometime in March and it didn’t always coincide with Easter.

      Where we are now, it’s two days at
      Thanksgiving, two weeks in Dec/Jan, a week in February and a week in April also not coinciding necessarily with Easter and school doesn’t start back until after Labor Day.

    • Lunde says:

      British schools are on holidays this week (Monday was a British public holiday) but they don’t break up for summer holidays until July.

      British state schools only get 5-6 weeks in the summer and the private schools get 7-8 weeks.

    • Moneypenny says:

      Massachusetts mom here. This is the exact schedule for my girls, Ader.

  8. TheOriginalMia says:

    The affair story will never die down. Didn’t they miss the Houghton Trials last weekend? That adds fuel to the fire. The truth will eventually come out.

  9. Becks1 says:

    Honestly, at this point I don’t even realize when Kate is taking a break and when she isn’t. After her month-long break, she did the garden party, and then just all the garden show appearances. Oh she and Will did that trip to Wales.

    It’s not like she was logging Princess Anne numbers for the past month.

    • Enn says:

      Also Bletchley Park.

      • Becks1 says:

        Okay, so one more. I can see why she needs another break, lol.

      • Enn says:

        Wait, I had to check, because I couldn’t remember if the Kings Cup thing was in Wales but it wasn’t, and also the visit to the family center (?) when she wore the green dress. ANZAC day at the end of April. These are just what I remember.

    • Enn says:

      Also, Becks, you’re right. They’re not Princess Anne numbers, and Anne doesn’t get the props she deserves for how hard she works. I’m just trying to be cautiously optimistic that Kate got a kick in the rear and will work more, because it can only benefit her patronages and causes (especially early childhood development and mental health awareness for families) if she keeps showing up and bringing attention. I genuinely want her to do better and do more.

      • Becks1 says:

        @enn – honestly, for all my complaining about her on here (I don’t actually talk about her that much IRL, lol), I do want her to do better and do more. I just don’t think we are seeing it. The fact that we can rattle off the engagements she has done in the past month is pretty sad. (I’m counting ANZAC, Anna Freud, Kings cup, Wales, garden show, and garden party.)

        I don’t fully expect her to pull in Anne-esque numbers, since not even Charles does that lol, but its enough to make me laugh when we hear about her taking another break.

      • Enn says:

        True, but with the school holiday it doesn’t surprise me that they’re heading to Anmer for the week. I know a few people with kids who extended the Memorial Day weekend to 4 days because everyone is burnt out by end of the year stuff!

      • notasugarhere says:

        Charles’s numbers some years are higher that Anne’s, most years in fact. Anne goes home to her private estate, secured and fixed up with taxpayer money. Charles does The Duchy, Dumfries House, Prince’s Trust on top of his engagement numbers. Overall, Charles does far more work than Anne.

  10. Melissa says:

    I think a break is wonderful because we all need a break from the oversaturation of stories about Kate watering her garden. I’ve never seen so much ridiculous hype about trees and shrubs!

    • Megan says:

      The Chelsea Flower Show is over 100 years old and is one of the most prestigious flower shows in the world. Having a garden in the show is a very big deal.

      • Melissa says:

        I know all about the show. Kate is neither the first person to have a garden showcased at the event, nor will she be the last. There were dozens of interesting gardens that didn’t get any coverage because of the royal PR machine promoting Kate.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        The Chelsea Flower Show is also a MAJOR event of the London social season.

      • Tina says:

        Harry’s Sentebale garden at Chelsea a few years ago got attention too, but not as much as this.

      • Wigletwatcher says:

        She also was a co-designer with others. Meaning she was the name attached so the architects would get better coverage. Even at the most hype we heard Kate attended design meetings, went on photo for pr walks in the woods and added thoughts.
        That’s what this was. And it drowned out a lot of the show for other creators.

        Meanwhile, what about Broken Britian? Heads Together?

      • notasugarhere says:

        Harry has had two Sentebale Gardens. The second one won multiple awards, so yes, his got natural public attention vs. the KP-drive hype of the garden Kate posed in but did not design.

      • Vi says:

        @notasugarehere LOL at the hilarious bias here. Did Harry design his garden?? No. Do you have some evidence that contradicts the fact that Kate didn’t just “posed” but was involved in the planning with her own ideas and input? I doubt it. And I think her behind -the-scenes involvement is also well documented in their CC.
        Her garden,because yes, it was also her garden,was (as a matter of fact) uccessful with queues of people waiting to see it. It didn’t win any awards because it was a RHS garden,but you can fake the interest of people with the “PR overdrive”.

    • Beach Dreams says:

      That IS one nice benefit. With all the promo they were putting out, you’d think she was doing something groundbreaking.

      • Becks1 says:

        Kensington Royal posted NINE times about it on their IG over the past 10 days. NINE. They were lovely pictures, and the kids seemed to enjoy it, but talk about hype.

      • Megan says:

        I’ve posted about my cat at least NINE times in the last 10 days. She has thousands of followers and I need to feed them content. It’s my understand that is how social media works.

      • Becks1 says:

        does your cat really have thousands of followers? Weren’t you lecturing someone upthread about hobbies?? (I’m joking lol).

        If anyone posts 9 times about any one event when you can add multiple pictures to IG posts, then yeah, I’m going to roll my eyes and think its being overhyped. If Kate and William were doing more work, KP would have more stuff to post about.

      • lawyergal says:

        LOL @Becks1.

      • Wigletwatcher says:

        Your social media is work and PR based?
        Because KP is. And to post a single event that was less work and less impactful on all Kate’s keen ideas… more just a fun social outing from a PR angle. To stretch that for 9 days? It says there’s nothing else. Nothing to report on. Nothing progressing. Just this event that came and went with the work others did.

        I’m not shaming cat posts. I just think it’s a weak parallel.

      • Megan says:

        Actually, my social media kind of is work based. One of the things I do is design social media strategies for our clients and I need to prove I know what I am doing. I created social accounts for my cat because I didn’t want to put my public life on display for my clients and she is so docile and photogenic, she provides a lot of easy content.

        So I guess KP is using the same strategy because Kate is also docile and photogenic.

      • CatWomen says:

        I agree with Megan. I’m a boomer so I had a hard time with Instagram but I finally get it. Your creating a graphic record of your life, it’s fun. Megan Markle posts more then 6 or more posts per day, which is normal for her kind of high follower profile and if you compare William and Kate’s posts to Megan it’s obviously MM upped W&Ks Instagram for the better. Megan has a little more of a personal touch both are fun to follow. Both families have privileges and so it’s great they share it with us.

      • Becks1 says:

        No, SussexRoyal does not post 5-6 posts per day. SussexRoyal made 4 separate posts about the birth of Archie. Not 9 separate posts about a garden. I’m not saying 9 pictures, I’m saying 9 posts. It was definitely overkill. But hey, Kate did something, so we need to celebrate it ad nauseum I guess, especially since she’s now back on vacation.

      • Vi says:

        @Becks KP had a lot of stuff to post about,actually. As much as people here like to pretend that William doesn’t do anything,his initiative with the FA and the BBC documentary was very good. And that was very publicized on their account. Same with the great initiative with the Metropolitan police that was launched last week.
        I’d say that KP didn’t have just the garden to hype with nine (scandal!) posts.

      • bonobochick says:

        @Becks1 I have to think KP did all those garden posts cause who knows when her next *big thing* will launch? How long have folks been waiting for some substance or info on Broken Britain? They have to prop the little she does to make it seem like she’s not work-shy.

        Do we know 2019 work numbers yet? I saw Prince Harry has a bunch of upcoming events circulating on twitter.

      • Nic919 says:

        I have seen William at 73, Harry at 68, Kate at 47 and Meghan at 38.

  11. Meganbot2000 says:

    I don’t know anyone who gets the week off every half-term. Most parents need to find childcare for half-term. And really, the Cambridges have like three full-time nannies, plus full household staff. And when they do “work” it’s the odd engagement lasting an hour or two. Absolutely no reason they need to take a full week off just because it’s half-term.

  12. Hildog says:

    And right before the Trump’s arrival? I can’t say I blame them…

    • BayTampaBay says:

      After the Chump State Dinner all attendees and staff will probably need a week off to recover.

  13. Mego says:

    I looked at some articles that were written about the Duchess of Cambridge’s initiative to help the children of broken Britain. Using her “convening” power she will bring together experts in an umbrella group and the work will continue for many years to come. Reports in September, 2018 said this initiative would be launched in the new year and that Kate is working hard behind the scenes.

    It is now nearing the end of May and not a word has been said about this initiative since those reports in September, 2018. Has the launch been delayed? New year is a vague time frame by I expected to hear something by April, 2019.

    I don’t believe there is much if anything happening around a big initiative however, given the coverage this got in multiple news outlets, I think it’s fair to wonder why this hasn’t been announced or followed up on by now.

    • Beach Dreams says:

      I believe one report claimed that the initiative would start within the first 3-4 months. We’re fast approaching the halfway point of 2019 and still nothing.

    • Becks1 says:

      There have supposedly been meetings held once a month about it. At Kensington Palace. That Kate does not attend.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Of course she doesn’t. This isn’t a Kate initiative, this is a Catherine Quinn desperate to make her useless client look better initiative.

      • Mego says:

        This convening power is more like a superpower if you can convene people to do the work without you. 🙄

      • Nic919 says:

        Kate had a few receptions for them at KP. Not sure the point of having a party when nothing has been launched yet.

    • Megan says:

      Who is convening and why? If this was really happening I think KP would put out some teasers to drum up interest in advance of a launch.

  14. bluecat says:

    Week off from what exactly?

    • BayTampaBay says:

      I think Cathy is a very hovering mother as we say in the USA. If her children are not in school she wants them with her 24-7. I think Cathy seems her job as being a mother and everything else is just volunteer work at her convenience. This works if you are rich man’s wife but does not play out well if you are supposedly a major working royal with all the perks that can be given.

      • Wigletwatcher says:

        Kate has always been driven. She has. Driven to get William. Driven to get I to his college. Driven to travel with him. Driven to be in his social circles. Driven to keep her body in a way he prefers. We all have different priorities. He was her main priority.
        Now she has him and priority has shifted to her children. The shame is because of her marriage and role and what supports her lifestyle she couldn’t shift a little of that drive to helping others while still being a devoted mother with all the luxuries anyone could hope for. Giving back is not what the entitled mindset allows.

        Now, when Meghan comes out of maternity leave Kate will be driven to be keen. Not until then.

      • Lady D says:

        I think Meghan is going to blow the DoC right out of the water on her first year as a working royal after maternity leave. The howls to send D&DoS to Africa are going to get louder and louder. Especially when they can’t use the ‘she’s a full time mother’ excuse for Kate anymore.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Social media is global. Therefore, I do not understand what will be accomplished by sending the Sussexes anywhere outside of the UK for an extended period of time..

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        I agree, she’s a helicopter mother like Carole is.

        To me Kate seemed to think that being a royal was being a lady of the manor character in Downtown – she really wasn’t prepared for the harsh realities of royal life.

      • A says:

        There are rumours that William and Kate live somewhat separate lives to some extent, in that Kate is very content to be off being a mother and doing her own thing (whatever that might be) while William is off…William-ing(?) I think she’s definitely carved herself a niche in this marriage in terms of her interests, and she’s happy with it.

      • Nic919 says:

        I thought it was interesting that William went to see Aston Villa and was in a box where others had brought their young kids and he hadn’t brought George. He’s almost 6 and would probably have liked to watch it live.

  15. BayTampaBay says:

    Does anyone know who designed the dress Rose is wearing in the pictures above?

    • Some chick says:

      It’s Valentino.

      I love the bodice and sleeves! Beautiful embellishment, and super flattering on Rose.

      In the full length photos, it gets patchworky down by the hem, which I’m not as into. (Made me feel better that I can’t afford one for myself, haha.) But the upper part is stunning.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        I absolutely love Rose’s dress but it looks like it is a size too big and the illusion netting is not laying properly. Cathy’s dress is bespoke tailored to perfection which makes her look really good IMHO.

        Does anyone think that Rose’s dress was a loaner as it is not perfectly tailored for bespoke fit?

      • Some chick says:

        Since Rose and her husband are supposedly richer than god, I seriously doubt she needs to bother with loaner dresses.

        She’s moving around in these candid shots. Fitted sleeves are also harder to fit than fluttery, unfinished sleeves.

        I think they both look lovely in their gowns. I’ve also always thought that William looked incredibly uncomfortable in these pics, and that the gowns are the least interesting aspect.

        Had she had any idea that these photos would turn into such a phenomenon, she’d have probably done her hair more carefully as well! 😀

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @ Some chick,

        I did not mean to imply Rose could not afford the Valentino. What I thought was that maybe due to her connections in the fashion and entertainment industry, Valentino loaned her this beautiful dress to wear to this very high profile event. These events usually get covered by Tatler in the UK and Town & Country in the USA. The readership/subscriber-ship of Tatler in the UK and Town & Country in the USA are target clients for Valentino. Valentino dressing Rose for this event makes excellent PR and good marketing sense to me.

        Anyhoo, back to my original hypothesis: I think the dress could fit better and could only come up with two possible reasons why 1) Rose really just does not care and this is 100% OK or 2) The dress was a loaner which went back to the Valentino archive after Rose wore it.

      • Some chick says:

        It’s from an off the peg resort collection from a few years back.

        I don’t see issues with the fit. The hem length is perfect (usually the big tell for a loaner). Not everything has to be skintight. I see it as ease in the design.

        Maybe I’m just biased (ha!) as I do love the bodice and sleeves and would wear. (The next time I’m invited to an aristo garden party, look out!)

  16. BayTampaBay says:

    Duplicate Comment!

  17. BayTampaBay says:

    Triplicate comment!

  18. DML says:

    In Massachusetts we also get a week off in February. I’m assuming it is because the weather is so miserable and everyone is sick so they sanitize the schools. LOL

  19. Margareth says:

    LMAO they’re a joke

  20. burdzeyeview says:

    I agree Kate is lazy, it appears she always was and her raison d’etre was to bag (and keep) William (no accounting for taste). I wouldn’t have a problem with her being a SAHM if she was honest about it – I do have a problem with KP pretending that she is working hard “behind the scenes” on whatever initiative they can think of at the time. However, as work shy as she is, William takes the cake because he was born into it…of course he appears to have spent his life bemoaning this fact but readily accepts the privileges his lifestyle allows – but he is 37…he is supposed to be a full-time royal – he is going to be king some day and basically he cant be arsed. (He can manage to attend football matches though). He doesn’t work half as much as his 70 year old father and 93 year old grandmother and appears to spend inordinate amounts of time being jealous of his much cooler and likeable brother and his new family and briefing against them – of course he’s had an affair (or more than one) and of course Kate will stand by him – its what aristos and royals do. He ought to be ashamed of himself though I’m sure self reflection, self- improvement and guilt are not part of his life. What an arse.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      Does anyone else get the feeling the Bill is not really liked by the aristo set?

      • Jaded says:

        For sure he’s not. The Toffs are not like regular neighbours who like hanging out together for BBQs and kiddie parties. They’re extremely hoity-toity and live a very private and cloistered existence. They all boast prestige, lineage, titles and massive amounts of money that exceed what Bill and Cathy have, especially as Cathy is considered a social-climbing parvenu whose family is common as horse turds. Rumour has it that David and Rose are the leaders of the group and you’re supposed to follow group rules and keep your pie-hole shut no matter what shenanigans are taking place. Bill, by virtue of his entitled arrogance, and Cathy broke that rule and have probably been ostracized.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Jaded, I always thought that if anyone got “phased out” it would be Cathy not Rose.

      • A says:

        @Jaded, @Bay, the toffs might not like William on a personal level. But since he’s the second in line to the throne, they have to figure out how to mingle and get along with each other for the rest of their lives. The whole set is notoriously insular. These are a group of people who have all grown up together in some fashion. If you’re in that set, you can’t escape them, especially the Cholmondeleys, who have an actual official position with the Queen.

        They can try to phase out Kate, but the fact is that they’ll have to curtsy to her for the rest of their lives. They’ll only be seeing more of her in an official capacity, not less. I don’t think Kate is the sort of person who is willing to forgive and forget–she strikes me as a Queen Mother type, someone with a long memory, willing to play the long game, and even if she doesn’t get back at Rose Hanbury today, she will at some point in the future. And if the rumours are correct, it was Rose who broke the rule of silence, not William or Kate.

  21. Andrea says:

    If they feel in competition with Meghan and Harry, they aren’t doing themselves any favors by taking this much time off.

  22. Andrea says:

    In addition, I firmly believe the affair rumors won’t die because it is true.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      They are rumor fires are not dying down in the USA and there is still quite a bit of smoke.

  23. Corporatestepsister says:

    Working is good for the monarchy; Kate isn’t doing duties, earning her titles and perks and she isn’t at all bringing jobs to the UK. If she is superfluous, if it’s the job of politicians to do all she’s supposed to be doing, what is the point of the entire system? The less she does, the more vulnerable she is; Diana did endless duties and had two fine sons, but she was eventually kicked out. Kate does nothing and brings nothing and has three kids; that will not protect her if it all goes to Hades.

    • Meganbot2000 says:

      I don’t agree at all. None of the royals bring jobs to the UK (well, except in terms of employing their own staff I guess) and I agree that the RF overall are pretty superfluous. But Kate’s no more vulnerable than any of the other royals.

      Diana was kicked out because she was actively working to undermine the RF, leaking like mad to the press and smuggling journalists and TV cameras into the palace so she could explicitly and overtly attack her husband and the RF including going on national TV to tell the world how awful her husband was. Plus causing constant scandal by cheating on Charles all the time, sneaking her boyfriends in, and stalking men she fancied. Diana’s problems all started because she refused to tolerate being cheated on. I mean, good for Diana for standing up for herself, but she wasn’t “kicked out” — she decided she wasn’t willing to tolerate a marriage of duty.

      Kate is a bit workshy but she’s extremely dutiful and loyal, and very discreet, and seems willing to do whatever it takes to serve William and make him happy, and by extension serve the RF. Plus her main duty is to birth and raise heirs, which she has done. Anything more than that is just an added bonus. Unless Kate has a breakdown and either dumps William or starts running around in public screaming about what a shit husband William is (which is basically what Diana did), it’s hard to imagine anyone in the RF wanting or being able to “get rid” of her. William will never dump her because he’s too afraid of scandal (and why dump a dutiful wife who raises your kids and looks the other way when you cheat?) and there’s zero reason for the Queen or anyone else to interfere.

  24. Casey20 says:

    So Harry is at an event with the Queen today. He has every reason to pull the new baby card but hasn’t done it…..meanwhile Cambridge ‘s are off because???? Oh yes, Kate’s Garden was really hard work!

  25. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    William can be as lazy as he wants, and there’s nothing anyone can do about it. He can also have all the affairs he wants. He gets his titles, money, and everything else that comes with it, by virtue of his birth alone. He doesn’t have to “earn” any of it, or answer to anyone. That’s the price of having a monarchy.

    • Casey20 says:

      And he knows it!!! His only issue is popularity and the Sussex’s are a threat to that, otherwise the A-hole could careless!

  26. Lesanne says:

    On the other hand…the Chelsea was wonderful this year and they raised much money. Anyone can attend if you belong to the RHS which is a wonderful organization. They publish some dreamy books not just on gardens but on houses as well.

    • Meganbot2000 says:

      Agreed. And non-members can buy tickets (just not for the first two days which are for members only). I didn’t go this year but I took my mum last year and it was lovely.

  27. Vi says:

    The younger royals’ MO seems to have some public appearances in a row and then disappear for another week,10 days. And yes,I noticed the same with M&H last year.
    It’s not a problem if they move to the countryside with their children on their school breaks. It’s quite understandable why they would do this. I imagine the whole KP environment can be a bit like a fishbowl for the kids.And they have the privilege to plan their schedules.
    But since the public pereception for them IS important,and the private meetings don’t really matter in that regard,they should increase their public appearances before and after. Or they should include some local organizations to be involved with while they’re there.
    By the way,for all the comments above about the insane garden overhype and the fact that KP didn’t have anything else to post about ,it’s not actually true.
    As much as people here like to pretend that William does nothing while his brother is putting him to shame with his appearances once in two weeks,his BBC talk about male mental health in collaboration with the FA was very good. I saw that KP did actuality a great job promoting it. The initiative with the Metropolitan police that was launched last week was also publicized too. KP had actually a lot to post about in the past month.

  28. AtlLady says:

    There will be the final fittings for the outfits the children will wear for Trooping the Colour on June 8. As quickly as kids grow, a whole new outfit might be necessary other than what was planned. Catherine probably wants to be there for those fittings because a stern look from Mummy can keep a restless child from squirming, at least for a few moments. If anyone has had to endure countless fittings for tailor-made clothes as an adult, just imagine how irksome it is to a child. The children and Catherine always wear coordinated outfits on the balcony and look very neat and stylish. BTW, if Catherine was brought to tears at Charlotte’s dress fitting for Meghan’s wedding, I put it down to her still in-flux hormones after Louis’ birth three weeks prior and seeing how adorable her daughter looked in her dress. Those post-partum days are a jumble of emotion that come upon you with no warning or provocation.

    • Maria says:

      I firmly believe the fitting tears were not just postpartum emotions but Kate possibly getting very upset about Rose. Didn’t she learn about it late in her pregnancy with Louis?

    • A says:

      If I had the type of money that allowed me to purchase couture from some of the biggest designers in the world, I wouldn’t sit around thinking that the multiple fittings were “irksome.” I’d try an schedule a few more to make sure that the things fit just right.

      And I agree with you abt Kate + the hormones. Someone else said that it’s likely Kate was going through some type of postpartum emotional situation when she allegedly burst into tears, and that she apologized to Meghan and explained what had happened afterwards.

  29. Leena says:

    Cambridges spending half term with their children doesn’t have the same click power does it?

  30. A says:

    I’m cackling at the idea of them hanging out in Norfolk among the whole Turnip Toff crew again. I want more gossip! I can’t wait until one of them becomes too old to give an eff and they write their memoir and spill all the details.

  31. BayTampaBay says:

    ” I want more gossip!”

    ME TOO! Guess we will have to wait for Chump State Dinner to see who is setting where. I hope the videographer get some good shots of the formal evening dresses & jewelry.