Prince Philip’s ‘friend & companion’ Penny Knatchbull will attend his funeral

Lady PENELOPE ROMSEYWife of Lord RomseyAttending the funeral of HM Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother at Westminster Abbey, LondonCOMPULSORY CREDIT: UPPA/Photoshot PhotoUE 019119_P   09.04.2002

Well, the final list has been approved and sent out. Because of Covid protocols for funerals and public gatherings, the Windsor klan could only have 30 people at Prince Philip’s funeral. The list of 30 has been debated heavily in the British media, so much so that I would guess that people were actually wagering money on who would make the cut. In the end, all of Philip’s children and grandchildren will be there and none of the great-grandchildren will attend. Prince William won’t be able to lay his head on Carole’s lap at the funeral because the Middletons will not be attending. Two of Philip’s “German relations” will attend but we’re not supposed to talk about how his sisters married Nazis. But the most interesting revelation on the list: Penny Knatchbull, Philip’s “companion” and “dear friend” who was mourning “privately” this week.

Prince Philip will be surrounded by his wife of 73 years, four children, eight grandchildren and other close family members and friends at his funeral. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Duke of Edinburgh will be laid to rest at St. George’s Chapel in Windsor Castle on Saturday surrounded only by close family members and friends. Queen Elizabeth had to “make some difficult decisions” about who could be there keeping with the 30-person limit, a Buckingham Palace spokesman says.

“We are dealing with a family funeral and at its heart it is still a family event,” the spokesman adds. The spokesman did not elaborate on whether Prince Philip was involved in choosing who he wanted to attend his funeral before his death.

Queen Elizabeth will be joined at the funeral by her and Prince Philip’s four children — Prince Charles, Princess Anne, Prince Andrew and Prince Edward — along with Charles’s wife Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, Anne’s husband Timothy Laurence and Edward’s wife Sophie, Countess of Wessex.

Philip’s eight grandchildren — Peter Phillips, Zara Tindall, Prince William, Prince Harry, Princess Beatrice, Princess Eugenie, Lady Louise and James, Viscount Severn — will also attend the funeral.

Prince William’s wife Kate Middleton, Zara Tindall’s husband Mike Tindall, Princess Eugenie’s husband Jack Brooksbank and Princess Beatrice’s husband Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi will join their spouses. Other family members of the Queen attending include Princess Margaret’s daughter Lady Sarah and her husband Daniel Chatto, Prince Richard of Gloucester, Prince Michael of Kent and Princess Alexandra.

Prince Philip will also have some of his German relatives, two great-nephews and a cousin, in attendance: Prince Bernhard, Hereditary Prince of Baden; Prince Donatus, Landgrave of Hesse; and Prince Philipp of Hohenlohe-Langenburg.

Penelope Knatchbull, Countess Mountbatten of Burma, who joined the royal family through her relationship with Norton Knatchbull, 3rd Earl of Mountbatten, will also attend.

[From People]

The AP Style Guide reminded everyone this week that we’re not supposed to use “mistress” to describe women like Penny. We can call Penny the companion and friend to Philip and say that they enjoyed many carriage rides together and that she was a frequent visitor to Wood Farm when he was in residence over there. Anyway, I’m glad she’ll be there. I’m also surprised that so many spouses made the cut! I didn’t think Jack Brooksbank, Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi and Mike Tindall would attend.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, WENN and Getty.

Related stories

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

257 Responses to “Prince Philip’s ‘friend & companion’ Penny Knatchbull will attend his funeral”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Seraphina says:

    So if his companion made the cut I guess that means Liz was OK with the “friendship”????

    • Eleonor says:

      I am polyamourous, so for me all of this makes perfect sense, and I have come to the conclusion that long wedding/relationships have their own rules, whatever make the two persons inolved happy it’s a ok, as long as they agree.
      I think for Elizabeth was better to have Philipp committed in one relationship, instead of wandering around with several women.
      Plus the “official companion” in the aristos cyrcles it’s something that has always existed.

      • GraceB says:

        Thanks for that take on it @Eleonor. I think people too commonly jump to the conclusion that it’s an affair and that the other party is deeply hurt but marriages can work in many different ways. Especially when they last as long as the Queens marriage to Prince Philip.

        Also, just putting it out there but maybe it really was just a friendship. I know that’s boring but it’s also a possibility.

      • Eleonor says:

        @GraceB: , I think after all these years there must be (between the two women) some sort of respect or understanding and whatever their friendship was, I am happy she can attend the funeral.

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        Eleonor
        There’s quite a few times a shady article was written about the “companion” being unwelcome for overstepping with the narrative of Liz wanting her husband’s time and affection. The last being very recently when Prince Philip was recovering at Wood Farm (the illness before this last one) and Liz had her removed as “caretaker.”

        I think they both (pp and Liz) loved each other and their roles in life. And both took on other companions. But I don’t believe there wasn’t the displays of power and control tossed around And Liz was jealous quite often. And stories about how the lover would never leave his bedside and would always find a way to be with him.
        Shade was thrown both ways, but because Liz is Queen one side bent to the other.

      • Miss Margo says:

        This! Polyamory is more common then people may think. I have have known several people in my life who practice this. Now, whenever I see a headline like “so and so caught cheating!” I immediately think “they might just have an open relationship.” All is good and healthy!

      • PrincessK says:

        @Wiglet watcher….a most interesting perspective!

        I heard that the one the Queen was really jealous of, and with good reason, was Princess Alexandra her cousin. But the Queen still threw a 80th birthday party for her. For the Queen nothing gets in the way of duty. The presence of Penny at the funeral is a foregone conclusion.

      • Maria says:

        I am sorry but I find the comparison of this to polyamory very strange. Polyamory relies on honesty, communication, strong love and strong bonds. The Queen’s attitude toward Penny is the result of years of abusive neglectful infidelity on Philip’s part so she gladly accepted when he formed a long-term bond with someone quiet and malleable who respected her. But that isn’t polyamory.

      • Monica says:

        In a way, the Queen was married to her country. I can sort of understand PP wanting someone around who could pay him more undivided attention.

      • Isabella says:

        Phillip had a wandering eye. No doubt he continued to dabble with others.

      • candy says:

        I think these types of “arrangements” are way more common than people realize, and I don’t get the criticism. I mean, if after 73+ years you’re still with the person you met in your teens, I’m not gonna judge. I lived my teens and twenties totally single, and no way I could not have committed to just one person. Luckily, in my time, you didn’t have to. Attraction fades after 2 or 3 years tops.

      • A says:

        @Eleanor, you’re presuming a level of maturity and well-adjustment that is utterly non-existent among the royal and aristocratic circles, like the one Philip was a part of. A polyamorous relationship requires a level of honesty and trust that these people simply would not have been equipped with, period. The result is that any polyamorous seeming relationship is not one where two loving people do what’s best for them, it’s usually two people who can’t communicate choosing to prioritize selfishness above all else.

        Making the best of your unhappy circumstances bc you feel like you have no other choice, except to turn a blind eye to your husband’s infidelity, and ultimately coming to a peace with it within yourself, after decades of dealing with it, is about as far removed from a happy, healthy, fulfilling polyamorous relationship as it can get. Being in a polyamorous relationships means that you were, and are, able to ask for what you need from your spouse without shame or fear. Engaging in those relationships means you need to be able to communicate honestly and openly with your spouse/partner, and once again, you’re talking abt people who were brought up to do the exact opposite of that in all circumstances.

        I was reading Lady Anne Tennant’s biography the other day, and she talks in it about how, for her generation, you simply didn’t engage in a great deal of introspection. Talking about your emotions, in particular, was a huge no. You were expected to buck up and get on with things, with as little complaints as possible. Communicating sincerely about your emotional needs to your spouse was simply not done.

        Also notice how, in any article abt Penny Knatchbull, she is described not just as the Queen’s close friend, but also that the Queen’s admiration for her greatly increased when Penny’s own husband, Norton Knatchbull, ran off with his mistress to some island in the Caribbean, bc Penny didn’t let a small detail like her husband deserting her stop her from continuing her duties wrt the management of the Mountbatten estate. The Queen was apparently full of praise for the fact that this lady, in the face of such indiscretion and embarrassment, just kept trucking on without blinking.

        There’s a lot to unpack in that one detail alone, & what it says abt the Queen and Penny Knatchbull and Philip. But ask yourself, sincerely, if all of this is conducive to a happy, healthy, emotionally fulfilling polyamorous relationship. These people *seem* like they’re happy, and the arrangement seems like it was one that existed. But there’s a huge gulf between it being a sincere arrangement that fulfilled everyone’s needs, vs one that was accepted as the best case scenario anyone could hope for.

      • lara (the other) says:

        Thank you!!!
        Adult longterm realtionships are more coplicated and complex than the traditional lovestory.
        When my parents romantic relationship ended or rather fizzeld out, the decided the would keep the family unit as a legal and emotional core but seperate as a couple.
        The both had other partners but stayed freinds and keept the family feeling. When my mother got ill and died, my father spend the days and night with us sitting next to her while his new partner organized the day to day stuff for us.
        The romanic relationship might had ended 15 years ago but he told be, she was his best friend, his first great love, the mother of his kids and the woman who supported and belived in him for years.
        Love ist complicated.

      • Christine says:

        Lara, thank you for sharing. Your parents’ relationship is beautiful, and yes, complicated. I am a single mom, and I wish I had that sort of relationship, that moves from love, to friendship, comfort, and solace.

    • goofpuff says:

      I’m sure Elizabeth had her “special companions”. She just had to be more discreet because of misogyny.

      • Betsy says:

        I would *love* to know who they are, if any, some day. I only know of “Porchie” from The Crown, but they closed that thread on the show so I have no idea if anything happened in reality.

      • Eleonor says:

        @WIGLET WATCHER: that is my personal take on this.
        Or the effing protocol has a rule for companions and public funerals who knows!
        Probably Elizabeth had/has her own companion, and yes misogyny but also she is the chief of the Church of England (correct me if I am wrong) so no way we can have information on this.
        What I am trying to say is that we can’t know what was going on between these three persons, but everything is not black and white.
        Maybe she was just “a friend”, but Philipp wanted to spend his last years with her, and he looked happy. This is what I see.
        Personally I think it’s lovely she can attend the funeral, and I think I will discuss this with one of my partner, the married one ^__^ .
        (His wife knows everything, and has another relationship too, just to be clear)

      • Rita says:

        The queen’s companion was porchie/porcher her racing manager also rumoured to be prince Andrew’s father.

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        Eleonor
        I get that! And different strokes for different folks! I’m only saying with how the media that has taken direct cues from the BRF and courtiers there was a lot of shade thrown at Penny like she was inserting herself into PP’s in an Intrusive to his wife sort of way.

        I understood the rules as unwritten that once kids are all done the woman can take a lover. And the man can any time as long as he’s discreet.

        I’m just saying there was so much approved shade thrown at penny through the proper channels in a way sympathetic to the queen that this was not an arrangement agreed upon by all parties at all times.

      • DuchessL says:

        That would be like the treasure of all gossip to know who were the lovers of QE. But I kinda doubt she was like that, she just seems so committed to her job and image that she wouldnt risk annything. However I think she wasnt happy with Penny, but what could she do? This is really not the time to have another explosive revelation, so Penny will attend the funeral so there will be no drama aside from the brothers not walking side by side shoulder to shoulder.

      • Emm says:

        @rita, I just went and looked at pics of him and yeah, I can see that.

      • Maria says:

        She was devoted to Philip and if she had companions they definitely came after he started being unfaithful not before.
        This is not a narrative of polyamory. It’s a common aristocratic Royal marriage that had comfortable parameters for those involved for various reasons but they are all contingent upon their behavior within that world and the Royal system.
        Penny’s presence is with a few differences the equivalent of Queen Alexandra allowing Edward VII’s mistress to visit him on his deathbed.

      • Carrie says:

        Betsy – see images of a young Porchester and then Google images of a young Andrew!!

      • Nikki* says:

        Actually you are not sure, and neither is anyone else on this site.

      • Doublesteff says:

        On go just looked at a photo of young Porchie with HM. I mistook him for Andrew. I guess we know why he is her favorite.

    • BabsORIG says:

      Naaaah, Knatchbull just knows way too much and it seems there are people with some brain cells involved in decision making at this point. Leave her out of the funeral, you run the risk of pissing her off and you have a potential tell all on your hands. Nope, PP told her where all the skeletons are buried, and PP is gone now so she has nothing to lose by exposing the MOFOs. Involve her in the funeral, keep her happy and she’ll take all the family secrets to her grave.
      That or PP left it in his will that she is to attend willy nilly. Maybe, he hated TQ so bad he wanted to flip her one last bird and tell her to Fukc you MoFo, LOL,

      • L84Tea says:

        I will freely admit that THAT is one tell all I would gladly read!

      • Va Va Kaboom says:

        It does seem like the BRF finally have someone with at least an ounce of sense on their team right now. I thought the decision to avoid military dress uniforms completely for the men following the casket was a smart move, for example.

        It may be too early to tell with the Knatchbull invite though. Because if she hasn’t signed an airtight NDA all they’ve really done is add credence to any tell-all she may write one day.

      • Seraphina says:

        It would wonderfully scandalous to find out THAT tea indeed. I just picture Liz as a very petty woman and was surprised she made the cut of 30. It’s not like attending a mass funeral where she would “blend in” and Liz could pretend she is not there. Difficult to hide among 30. Wonder what is running through Katie Keen’s mind. Wills may do the same to her.

      • A says:

        It’s not as if Ms. Knatchbull herself doesn’t have skeletons in her own closet. She married into a prominent aristocratic family that has tons of embarrassing secrets of their own. Her own husband ran off to the Caribbean with his mistress for 4 years, and Penny Knatchbull threw him out. He came crawling back, but he lives on a different property on their estate, while she lives in the main house, bc she doesn’t want to be with him. Her son was a former heroin addict who was squatting in East London.

        She has everything to lose by exposing all their secrets. For one thing, her husband and his family is related to Prince Philip. Phil doesn’t have secrets that wouldn’t also reflect poorly on these people as well. If she’s keeping a tight lid on this sh-t, it’s bc she’s looking out for the sake of her own family and the legacy she’s looking after for her children.

      • My3cents says:

        Replying to A
        I don’t see her writing anything, but I definitely see a scenario where one of her children/close family members writes something after her passing. Never underestimate the things people will do to make a quick buck.

      • Tezza says:

        Nah Penny’s family ( the Mountbatten’s )have plenty of nasty secrets of their own . She’d be in no position to say anything

    • Shahad says:

      I don’t even like the royals but is it possible she was just a friend? I don’t see why such a smart and beautiful woman who is 31 years younger than Phillip would go for a man who is so much older than her . I don’t see it , I mean where is the thrill ?

  2. Over it says:

    I don’t know what Ap style book is , but I enjoyed the laugh.

    • Anony83 says:

      Between them and the Dictionary, word-Twitter (for lack of a better description) can be pretty shady. And I love it.

    • Eleonor says:

      Me too! LOL

    • Me says:

      The thing is, using mistress or gigolo precisely coveys the fact that the side person is financially supported by the otherwise married paramour. The Countess is not a mistress; PP did not pay her bills.

      • Lady D says:

        I’ve never even heard that fact before. The only definition I’ve ever heard for mistress is a woman in a relationship with a man married to another woman.

      • TeamMeg says:

        “A kept woman” is another term for the mistress who is financially supported by her married lover.

      • PrincessK says:

        Their relationship ran very deep. Prince Philip didn’t attend the christening of one of William’s kids but turned up for one of Penny’s grandkids. Why on earth choose a 90 year man to be a godfather…..more to it l think.

      • Waitwhat? says:

        But “mistress” and “gigolo” aren’t semantic equivalents; a mistress is a woman who has a relationship with a married man (and may or may not be supported financially by him), while a gigolo is a (young) man who is financially supported by at least one wealthy (often older) woman. There’s a similar element of moral condemnation implicit in both, but no male equivalent of “mistress”. A man who has a relationship with a married woman is called, if anything, her lover, I guess? So I’d argue that we shouldn’t use mistress because its misogynist.

      • Isabella says:

        Aristocratic blood does not protect you from loneliness. Elizabeth didn’t have a lover living with her during the years of Penny and Wood Farm. She and Phillip lived apart. The Crown does a beautiful job of showing the sadness in that marriage. It also shows the gaslighting of Diana faced with the errant Charles. Kate is having a hard time with William. None of these marriages are enviable and I feel sorry for Penny. No more carriage rides for her.

      • MJM says:

        Princess K is on to something I think. I think Penny was the love of his life and he just wanted to spend his final years with her. They look very happy together in pictures.

      • Golly Gee says:

        Interesting, Princess K! So are you speculating that one or both of her children may have been fathered by Philip?

    • liz says:

      AP Style is one of the major editing handbooks for newspapers. It is used to determine when/if a word is capitalized (championship or Championship), where/how punctuation is used (Oxford comma or no), and yes, how to properly refer to a married man’s mistress in a news article.

    • Who ARE These People? says:

      News organizations have style guides that dictate how the spelling, punctuation, word choices, etc. used by their reporters and editors.

      The Associated Press Style Book is one of the most widely adopted guides in journalism.

      It’s the equivalent to following the MLA or APA guidelines for a research paper in college or university.

      • Cecilia says:

        So if the daily mail all of a sudden starts talking about william and his companion rose hanbury we know whats up?

      • JT says:

        @Cecilia The Fail has discussed Rose and William in this way before. There were some mentions of William’s long walks with the marchioness and private dinners when Kate was away. Where Kate was when she doesn’t actually work and why was William in Norfolk for these walks so often is another story. They always mentioned Kate’s rural rival and their falling out, followed up by a few sentences on “William’s closeness with Rose”. The Taler article on Kate was a bit more pointed though, before KP (or Rose herself) had those sentences removed.

      • PrincessK says:

        The annoying thing is that if Harry had an extra marital relationship, he would be crucified and yet all of the people who pour hatred on the Sussexes are sympathetically explaining away Philips relationship with Penny. Double standards.

      • Golly Gee says:

        Whoops. Posted below before seeing your excellent explanation of the AP style book.

    • Golly Gee says:

      Associated Press. I think it’s meant to be a style book for journalists.

  3. Mamasan says:

    There she is.

    That’s a fine respectable family when they invite his mistress to the funeral.

    And these people feel they are born higher than everyone else because of their bloodline? 🤭 Nope, don’t think so.

    • Ang says:

      Right!?!?!?! I just can’t believe it!

      • MMadison says:

        I can. They are all related to each other anyway. Prince Phillip and Elizabeth met when she was like 13 or something like that and he was 19. It’s how they live and why they like to keep their lifestyles a secret. It’s also why there was the huge OUTRAGE from Turnip Set when Kate went after Rose and the same when Diana went after Camilla. I’m sure The Queen was hurt at first and maybe she still carries hurt feeling but she at 94, understands that lifestyle better than anyone else…..thus the invite to the funeral.

    • liz says:

      I remember the photos from Francois Mitterand’s funeral in France about 25 years ago. His wife and their sons standing beside the coffin with his mistress and their daughter right next to them. Totally different way of looking at life.

    • SomeChick says:

      I think it’s more respectable to acknowledge the relationship than to try to pretend it didn’t exist. More humane, certainly.

  4. Ang says:

    😳😮😬 So the Associated Press is just throwing poor Prince Phillip to the wolves there, eh?
    I’m shocked by how blasé this all is. So that woman really was his full on second wife/ mistress/ sexual and emotional partner cuckolding the Queen of England, and she’s invited to the highly selective funeral as the ONLY non-family guest?!?! Why isn’t this a high headline and scandal?! Are mistresses “de rigeur”?

    • Couch potato says:

      She was married to a Mountbatten, so she’s “family”. I read somewhere they started their carriage riding in the mid 90′s, meaning he was in his mid 70′s. I know some men keep it going til old age, but how functional is a 75 y.o. man?

      • Eleonor says:

        Old people, persons with health conditions can share bodies and affection in different ways. Sex can be intimacy, tendreness, not always what we think.

      • Couch potato says:

        That’s true Eleonor

      • PrincessK says:

        I think that the carriage riding in the early days was an excuse for their trysts.

        They were also invited to house parties which the Queen wasn’t invited to, and one host actually had to say they had separate bedrooms, as if that meant anything.

      • ennie says:

        A dashing old uncle of mine kept his womanizing ways well into his old age. He was very, very handsome, animist t have cut a great visual in his charro suit with his height and his looks, he was a nice uncle and friendly man, but he was (of course word got around) VERY promiscuous and gave my aunt no hope, as she was very in love and had the firm idea that people did not separate or divorce.
        It was humiliating, to her ,to say the least to know of these thing even when they were older. They were together for over 75 years of marriage, and one could not know all this by looking at the family together.
        He was taken on his romps by employees or maybe male family members even after he was ninety. If he had had a steady lover , I don’t know, but I would not discard it. It could have been some kind of love on her part, there are many people with daddy issues.

      • christina says:

        viagra

      • Andrea says:

        My best friend said his grandfather complained in his 80′s when his wife had hip replacement that they both would have to go several weeks without sex. There is a reason the 65+ crowd have the 2nd highest STD rates in the nursing homes!!! I am friends with a 74 year old lady who told me she got a STD at 55!!

      • PrincessK says:

        @Andrea I heard about an 80 year old who was complaining that his same aged wife was not giving him what he wanted.

    • Ines says:

      It is not a headline “out of respect for the grieving Queen”. Lots of people on denial on the daily mail, saying that she was clearly just a dear friend and nothing else.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        The two biggies in Philip’s later life were Sasha, Duchess of Abercorn, who passed away on December 10, 2018, and Penny Knatchbull, Countess Mountbatten of Burma.

        It would not be fair to consider these two women as just some “side piece” as they were much more than that to Prince Philip.

      • L84Tea says:

        @BTB, as usual you share the best details on these juicy background “characters” (for lack of a better word) that I have never heard of. How I wish I could sit down with you and a full pot of tea and pick your brain!

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @L84Tea – You gotta invite nota too!

      • L84Tea says:

        @BTB, I will make enough for everyone. You, nota, Becks1, Snuffles, etc. I’ll have sandwiches and cake galore.

      • PrincessK says:

        @Tampa Bay….you have omitted Princess Alexandra.

      • Becks1 says:

        I’ll be there! I like cake and sandwiches lol.

    • Julaine says:

      Someone needed to represent the Mountbattens/Milford Havens as they were Prince Philip’s birth family on his mother’s side. Prince Philip was very close to Louis Mountbatten the 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma. The 1st Earl had 2 daughters of which one is still alive (Lady Pamela Hicks) but not much younger than Philip himself. The current Earl is Louis’s grandson, Norton Knatchbull, who is said to be in extremely poor health as well. So it may be that Penny got the spot due to her being the senior member of Philip’s mother’s family available and not because of her romantic/intimate friendship with Philip.

  5. Harper says:

    So much for Baldimort’s bragging about Kate getting to know Philip now that BottleBoy and the Mozz scored seats in the chapel too despite only recently joining the family. I’m thinking that the only uncomfortable person at this funeral will be Kate, as she’s disliked by Bea, Eugenie and Harry now. Penny and the Queen are supposedly very friendly with each other.

    • Florence says:

      Haha, BottleBoy and the Mozz sounds like a British comedy band. Like Professor Elemental or something.

      I wonder if Kate can hide her squirms.

      • Jumpingthesnark says:

        Bottle boy and the Mozz are likely there because Bettys fave son pedo Andy campaigned for it behind the scenes. Maybe it was a consolation since he wasn’t allowed to wear his admiral cosplay?

  6. Abby says:

    Omg AP Style. The shade! I can’t believe this is a real tweet. I’m a journalist and use AP Style religiously for my style questions. 💀

  7. Cecilia says:

    This woman reminds me of sophie of wessex. They sort of look a like.

    • L84Tea says:

      She reminds me of Kate Winslet. That photo of her laughing in the car made me do a doubletake the first time I saw it.

  8. My3cents says:

    Rose take note.

    • Cecilia says:

      Kate is the one that should take note. Apparently aristo’s like to keep their competition close. So kate better get those invites ready for their next event and invite the marchioness of cholmondeley

    • TeamMeg says:

      Rose is cultured and intelligent, has a kind, mature husband who is very high ranking, two beautiful boys to raise, and a gorgeous massive property/art museum to manage. I doubt she remains too interested in William, if she ever was.

      • JT says:

        Kate was the one trying to freeze out Rose, which is unheard of in those circles. Rose was the wrong one though, as her husband David Rocksavage is very important at court, according to @Baytampabay. (I’m not as knowledgeable on the aristo ins and outs).

        If the Queen could invite Philip’s companion Penny to his funeral, than Kate completely screwed up by trying to ostracize Rose.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @JT – Also, Rose’s maternal grandmother, Lady Elizabeth Lambart, was a life long friend from childhood of QEII and served as a bridesmaid to QEII at her wedding tpo Prince Philip.

        How STUPID could Kate be to try and “phase-out” Rose Hanbury Cholmondeley?

        @TeamMeg – Rose & David also have a daughter who is just as lovely as the twin boys.

      • JT says:

        @BTB you just keep making Kate seem even more ridiculous. Wow. Her grandmother was the queen’s bridesmaid!? Keen really was an outside amongst these people. I can’t believe she really tried to go there with Rose. No wonder Tatler put her on blast.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @JT – Kate does not need my help in looking ridiculous nor does she need Ma Middleton’s help. She is doing quite well on her own.

      • Becks1 says:

        Yeah Kate was ridiculous for trying to freeze out Rose. It was never going to happen. rose is invited to all the state dinners etc bc of her husband’s role. She’ll be at the Queen’s funeral, maybe Charles’s coronation, etc. The consort’s throne, that Kate will use, is stored at Houghton Hall!

        In a way though that gives the affair cover, right? If Rose attends a major event like the Queen’s funeral in the future, it has nothing to do with her relationship with William but her own status and role (well more so her husband’s but still.) If she and William have a long term affair like Philip did with several women, and she is invited to his funeral in 50+ years, well it has nothing to do with the affair you see, its because she’s the mother of the Great Lord Chamberlain.

        So the very thing that makes Kate look ridiculous for trying to freeze her out also protects Kate in a way bc it gives an explanation for Rose’s presence.

        (I am of the opinion that the affair is over but you get my bigger point.)

        (also I admit that I have never blamed Kate for “wanting” to freeze out Rose, I wouldn’t want to have to hang out with the woman my husband was sleeping with either, but she clearly just didn’t think the rules of the aristocracy applied to her. I am not an aristocrat, lol.)

      • JT says:

        @BTB It’s just crazy to see it all spelled out like this. If she looks stupid here, she must look completely ridiculous amongst the Turnip set. It makes her actions look even more absurd and it kind of explains her behavior towards Meghan. Kate was never going to come out on top with the Toffs. She probably needed to feel superior to somebody in that instance. She failed with Rose and almost succeeded with Meghan, but it backfired with H&M leaving. Although, I don’t know if Kate truly understands how much she f*cked up on that front. I suspect she’ll be feeling the heat when H&M start being more public for their projects.

      • Betsy says:

        @JT, you raise an interesting point: is the Queen’s coolness with this (inviting a companion to the funeral) just a teensy bit of a “KATE this is how it’s done”? I know that it was in Phillip’s will that she be there, so that’s not the *reason* she’s there, but it’s a bit of a “if you want to run in this circle, these are the rules.”

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @JT – This is the really weird thing: Kate wanted to be accepted by the Turnip Toffs and was viewed as a “try to hard wanna be”. Meghan who could not care less about the Turnip Toffs, Meghan is more of the Cotswold & London Luvvie Set type, got a grudging respect from the Turnip Toff.

      • JT says:

        @Betsy the queen could be setting an example. Hell, she gave Kate the royal order for keeping her trap shut and then we see Rose at church with the Keens.

        @Becks1 I don’t necessarily blame Kate for wanting to freeze Rose out, but it was dumb knowing how connected she is. It’s even more stupid when Kate has worked so hard to get in and then fit in with them. She really thought that being QC in 25 years makes her higher on the pecking order than some of these families that go back longer than the royals. She wanted to be in so badly she should have expected all of this.

      • JT says:

        @BTB so Meghan is begrudgingly accepted by them? That’s interesting and it must burn a whole in Kate’s ass to know that. It makes sense though, because it seems like the aristos have that “don’t care what you think” vibe too. Meghan was in those circles a bit too though. I find it fascinating that she was already friends with Princess Eugenie and I’m surprised that wasn’t a bigger story. She also knew several other people in his circle, in contrast to Kate who had to scrape and buy her way in to William’s. More and more I’m seeing why Keen was in full panic mode when Meghan came on the scene. Meg not only fit in with Harry’s friends but she was perfect for royal work too. Kate just seems like a joke the more I learn about her here.

      • Harper says:

        I do believe CarolE may have fed Kate the wrong advice on how to handle Rose. CarolE is the puppeteer behind Kate and has likely read everything about Diana without understanding that as an aristo Diana could go after another aristo but common-born Kate couldn’t. Not an unexpected mistake because I imagine it is hard for CarolE subconsciously to understand that Kate still isn’t respected or beloved. I think the Queen’s treatment of Penny will be a real eye-opener to Kate and CarolE, but I do suspect they learned their lesson quickly regarding how they handled Rose. That might have been why Rose came on the church walk for Kate’s birthday and why Kate and CarolE were all big smiles at such a weird and awkward outing. In their minds, Kate and CarolE were finally being true aristos and Kate was showing the toffs that she was made of the same stuff as the Queen by being seen being chummy with the Cholmondeleys. Of course, Kate’s pissed at Will in real life.

      • L84Tea says:

        These are all excellent assessments of the “phase out” debacle. Seeing all the rules and how it’s done all spelled out like this–the mistress getting a prime spot at the funeral on invitation from the queen–just proves to me how out of depth and in over her head Kate was and still is. Those Toffs must laugh their asses off when talking about her.

      • Dee Kay says:

        I honestly can’t think of why Rose Hanbury Cholmondeley would ever give William a second glance. Rose seems to have style and class and taste for miles. She seems to have built Houghton Hall into a legit Thing on the cultural map — a cool place to visit for the outstanding gardens and the artwork, in addition to the paintings/furniture/architecture aspects that any great hall/castle/mansion in the UK has. She does most or all of the photography of the estate herself and she is gifted at it. Why on earth would she ever sleep with boorish, dull, ill-tempered, stupid William????? I remember one Celebitcher recently suggested maybe it was primarily to mean-girl Kate!! Which seems like the *only* logical reason to me.

      • MerlinsMom1018 says:

        @TeamMeg
        I follow Houghton Hall on Insta. It’s STUNNING.

      • The Hench says:

        I rarely have tea but I have very reliable tea on this that Rose and William have been happening for at least three years. I don’t know whether it’s still happening but it was very much a relationship and not a fling.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @The Hench – I 100% believe your tea but, like Dee Kay, I do not understand what Rose sees in Baldingham let alone what could be there to sustain a relationship over 3 years.

      • The Hench says:

        @BTB – it’s a fair point! No accounting for taste I guess…

      • Becks1 says:

        @JT – that’s exactly it! I can understand Kate “wanting” to freeze out Rose but that’s not how the game is played. I keep circling back to the idea of Rose leaking the “rural rival” story to the press as payback. Yes she got her name out there but she also put the whole “William cheats on Kate” into play. Before that people kind of assumed it but its easy to gloss over when there is no name or face to put to it.

        I do think, like Harper said, that Carole was guiding Kate and she severely miscalculated.

        @TheHench – ooh that is tea! 3 years huh? That sort of makes sense, I saw a random comment on twitter a few months ago that they were going “hot and heavy” until COVID but obviously we don’t know if that’s true. But 3 years would make sense, the story broke in March 2019, and if we think back to the EACH gala at Houghton that was summer 2016. So maybe as far back as then?

        ETA also, Kate’s behavior makes more sense if William and Rose had more of a “relationship” and less of a “fling” – like maybe Kate could handle the cheating and affairs but not an actual relationship.

      • The Hench says:

        @Becks1 – yes – absolutely right, it is/was very much a full-on relationship apparently so no wonder Kate was worried. I don’t think she’d be sorry to lose Will, possibly even happy to have his attention elsewhere but I’d bet my arm on her being very worried about losing her position as FFQ.

      • Sofia says:

        For those asking “Why would Rose be with William?”, the answer is simple: bragging points. It the aristo circles it’s a bragging point to be a mistress of the Prince of Wales/King (or future in William’s case). Rose probably isn’t attracted to William physically (or maybe she is idk) but again, sleeping with the future King is a bragging point and that’s why she did/does it.

      • Sofia says:

        @The Hench: I’ve said it before but Kate’s ultimate goal is to be the FFQ and if she thought Rose/William’s relationship was deeper than she thought, she might have been scared that William would leave her for Rose and she would never see the throne. Hence her attempting to ice Rose out.

      • dollycoa says:

        Roses husband is gay and spends much of his time in France with his lover. Rose was his Heir supplier. Shes done that now, so they can both do what they like with other lovers.

      • Alexandria says:

        It’s normal of Kate to freeze Rose out but it is not normal to expect your cheating fiance who is FFK to stop cheating once he’s married to you. So in the first place if you didn’t want cheating, just don’t marry this dude.

      • Greywacke says:

        I think Kate has good reason to be scared of any longtime mistress because if Will really found a much more suitable companion, he would have no impediment to divorcing her. I mean, Charles did it. And it will be a long time before Will becomes King, so Kate may never end up being Queen. That seems more likely every day and with all these desperate stories about her importance.

      • A says:

        @Bay, another thing, while we’re on the subject of Meghan getting a grudging acceptance from the Turnip Toffs–this is the same reason why Penny Knatchbull, in spite of being a wealthy butcher’s daughter, was accepted into the fold and treated well. One of the articles I read described her as someone who was very “natural”, which I took to mean that she didn’t put on airs, or pretend to be anything except who she was. She seems like someone who is comfortable and confident in herself, plus she came from a reasonable amount of money, which would have been a plus point for any cash-poor but rolling in the prestige aristocrat, like the Mountbattens were. But again, the key here was that she was confident in herself. She didn’t make too much of her father being a butcher, etc. She “got on with it”, without too much fuss, which the Middletons are utterly incapable of doing, in spite of all the articles Carole likes to pump out insisting otherwise.

        Now, none of this dismisses the fact that the toffs are, and still remain, incredibly classist in their outlook towards the Middletons. They might feel annoyed and uncomfortable abt the try hard behaviour, but it’s not like none of them are any better in their embarrassingly craven in their social climbing either. Again, Rose Hanbury’s mother has been described as “pushy” when it comes to her daughters on more than one occasion, and both of them are married (under weird circumstances), to titled aristocrats who are much older than they are. Philip’s uncle Louis Mountbatten was the pushiest, most obvious social climber of them all, who openly bragged about it being the House of Mountbatten after the Queen ascended the throne. Every one of these people want to marry above their station, but god forbid the common middle-classes try to get in on that sh-t. They don’t like seeing it bc it provides them a mirror, and they don’t like that.

      • anotherlily says:

        Rose’s husband is gay/bisexual and spends much of his time in France with his male partner. The marriage is essentially a business arrangement. He needed an heir and married Rose when she was 4 months pregnant with twin boys. They married in a registry office the day after announcing their engagement. He’s 23 years her senior. Her sister is also married to a considerably older aristocrat. I’m sure it’s all very civilised

  9. Lauren says:

    Browsing through the comments on the daily fail coverage yesterday, some folks were smirking at having Princess Alexandra next to Penny. Two of Philip’s companion. Maybe Betty told him him that if he did require companionship, best keep it in the family.

    • Nick G says:

      Yes I thought Princess Alexandra was always a little more shocking, given that she is the Queen’s cousin….but of course her presence at the funeral is totally unremarkable as a family member.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        The really shocking thing to me is that she was also Philip’s first cousin as their fathers, Andrew and Nicholas, were brothers.

      • PrincessK says:

        According to the grapevine Philip and Alexandra adored each other and the affair persisted for 15 years across the 1950s and 1960s. I often wonder if that had anything to do with her daughter going off the rails for a long time and threatening to say embarrassing things. A while ago Charles stepped into rehabilitate this daughter who really fell on hard times.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        I read in some old Royal book (1970s????) that Philip had a “crush” on Alexandra’s mother Princess Marina of Greece. Princess Marina was also Philip’s 1st cousin.

        Let me be clear, I am talking “crush” not affair.

        Correction to previous post: Princess Alexandra’s grandfather was Nicholas of Greece. Her father was George, Duke of Kent.

      • Isabella says:

        Wow, just looked her up. Phillip definitely has a type.

      • Isabella says:

        Wow, just looked up Princess Alexandra. Phillip definitely has a type.

  10. Becks1 says:

    i think its interesting that Jack and Edo made the cut, since we were hearing that they wouldn’t for the past week – I wonder if Andrew put his foot down about them or if they were always going to be invited?

  11. Oh_Hey says:

    Wow was that some shade from the AP? It definitely looks like shade and a full read would have used names.

    Either way lol. At least this women gets to say her goodbyes without having to sneak in and the family seems good with that.

  12. Florence says:

    That AP tweet!!! No need for sunglasses today, there’s plenty of shade.

  13. Yoyo says:

    Guess the dailyfail was just throwing out the Ma and PA Middleton going to support Cain, to get them an jnvite.

  14. Amy Bee says:

    I’m glad Penny got invited too.

    • sunny says:

      Me too! I think there are so many types of relationships beyond monogamy. She was a part of his life and important to him, she should be there. I also don’t get those who think its disrespectful to the Queen or invalidates her relationship with Phillip. We don’t know what their marriage was like or what was agreed to.

      • MF1 says:

        I mean, the Queen clearly knew about their relationship, so… maybe she was fine with him keeping Penny as a companion as long as he was quiet about it?

      • PrincessK says:

        Well Penny would be with Phillip at Wood farm on the Sandringham estate and the Queen would be in the main house and then on Sundays Penny would leave Philip at home and join the Queen in Church. The Queen and Philip had been living separate lives for decades, and so all the talk about devotion is sheer hypocrisy. The Queen had accepted the situation.

    • MJM says:

      Me too. Of all of them she may well miss him the most.

    • Myra says:

      Same. The pictures of them together are very telling. There were some real feelings there on both sides.

  15. Merricat says:

    I think the York princesses’ husbands were included to help keep out any stray Middletons.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      @Merricat – You may be on to something.

      Inviting the “York” boys knocked out the Middleton’s and the spouses of the Gloucester’s and Kent’s. As it might have been impossible due to protocol to invite the Duchess of Gloucester & Duchess of Kent and not invite Prince & Princess Michael of Kent. It has been sated for years that QEII cannot stand Princess Michael of Kent.

      • Becks1 says:

        Prince Michael of Kent is attending, but his wife isn’t.

        the Middletons were never going to be invited, but now I’m wondering if there was more truth to that story from earlier this week than we thought and if William was pushing for at least Carole and Mike to get an invitation. Wonder how hard the Queen laughed when he asked, lol.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Becks1 – I did not know Prince Michael of Kent is attending. According to the Professional BSers at The Daily Fail, Prince Michael did not make the cut.

      • Becks1 says:

        @bay – the people mag article Kaiser cited above has Prince Michael listed (but not his wife), I guess we’ll see on Saturday though.

      • TabithaD says:

        The Duke of Kent is attending, but not Prince Michael of Kent.

      • Carolind says:

        There was not a hope in hell of any Middleton but Kate being there. The Middletons had less right to be there than Camilla’s family, for instance. In these circumstances they are nothing.

    • Kalana says:

      Lol. Now I’m thinking of Middletons skulking around outside the chapel like stray cats.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        @Kalana-that is a very funny image. Carole will definitely not be doing the stray cat strut!

        Next up is a story from Page Six or the Fail saying Carole opted out of her invite so she could take care of and provide comfort to George, Charlotte and Louis during this difficult time.

      • Christine says:

        Agreed, there will no doubt be a story about Carole Middleton having a mourning tree, for each of her grandchildren to pray to, for GGPhilip, or whatever the kids call Philip.

    • SurelyNot says:

      or to be there to support their wives who lost a beloved Grandfather?

    • PrincessK says:

      The Middleton’s would never have made the cut.

    • Doulton says:

      The list is very formal and correct in that the descendants of George VI are all represented with their spouses–hence Daniel Chatto is in. Lord Snowdon does not currently have a wife.
      If you bring in the Gloucester and Kent spouses, then you add another layer. Prince Michael and PP are not there officially, perhaps because his older brother and sister are there (although I concede that would be a little promotion for Princess Alexandra in line with the recent changes which privilege older sisters.
      So you could interpret it as pointing to the strength and dominance of the George VI line.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        PP=????

      • Doulton says:

        Sorry, BayTampaBay, I should have written out “Princess Pushy” (Princess Michael with her jolly blackamoor bling). I usually would have called Prince Philip the “DOE”.

      • lanne says:

        ofMichael is forever known to me as Brooch Bitch. What a mad cow.

      • A says:

        I think that the Duke of Kent would get invited bc he is the Duke of Kent. He has the title, he is the Queen’s cousin, and related to Philip through his mother. He is the most senior representative of the Kent relations. His wife is not accompanying him bc she stepped back from royal duties, and is for all intents and purposes separated from her husband, even if she is not divorced, so he doesn’t get a +1.

        Princess Alexandra, again, is close to both the Queen and Prince Philip. She is close to the Queen bc she is the only other female royal cousin on her father’s side, and she’s close to Philip bc. Welp. Man liked glamorous, good-looking women down for a fun time, I guess. Her husband has been long deceased, so she’s also coming alone.

        Prince Michael, in contrast, was never really rumoured to be close to Philip or the Queen all that much? At least, that’s what it seemed like to me. He is the younger brother of the Duke of Kent, and it always felt like he showed up when none of the others who outranked him could. Plus, I imagine that he was told that there would need to be room for Philip’s continental relations, and he was okay with not going bc he knows how these things work, given the circumstances. His wife, I imagine, is probably not happy abt this, although no one’s really going to give much of a sh-t about her right now, are they.

    • Dilettante says:

      This was my thought as well.

  16. CooCooCatchoo says:

    She is a gorgeous woman, and that riding outfit (the tan one with the big hat and man’s tie) is to die for. That’s all I’ve got.

  17. Watson says:

    Glad she’s invited but dear god is this family ever UNrelatable …

    • Doulton says:

      Unrelatable but replete with relatives……I wrote the upshot before but wanted to continue it today.

      I did some research on Penelope Eastwood Knatchbull, Countess Mountbatten of Burma. Her father earned a lot of money but the internet and the peerage have no information at all about her mother. Penny has no siblings listed ever. In her wedding photo from 1979, Knatchbulls and Mountbattens are all over the place but I cannot detect any of her own people.

      The current Countess Mountbatten–Penny– spent a lot of time with Prince Philip and they were very close. Her carriage racing with him helped to keep him alive and vital (from all that I can determine). Also she has not once spoken with the press as far as I know. Lady Pamela Hicks has given a few public interviews which might indicate that she is out of favor (of course Pammy has no money since Patricia’s children sold the lot for almost 7 million).

      Penny was comforted by the royal family when her daughter died and when her husband ran off with somebody named Jenny McNutty–or something like that. She is the type of “stay strong” and avoid the press friend that the royal family must cherish for her discretion. She and Prince Philip shared decades of close friendship.

      Mostly her inclusion will remind me a bit of the way that Queen Alexandra called for Edward VII’s mistress, Mrs. Keppel, to come to his death bed. And that, of course, reminds me that Mrs. Keppel’s great granddaughter is Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall. In the meantime, back in the day, Mrs. Keppel was supported financially by Sir Ernest Cassel who funneled money to her husband, Mr. Keppel. For more fun, Sir Ernest Cassel was grandfather to the first Countess Mountbatten of Burma who owned Broadlands, where Prince Philip and the Queen spent part of their honeymoon. Now it is managed by Penny, Countess Mountbatten.

      Do NOT confuse Philip’s friend, Penny, Countess Mountbatten (b. 1956) with Penny Mountbatten (b. 1966,).

      Now for those of you who are interested in Sasha, Duchess of Abercorn, her father was Bunny Phillips the long time paramour of Edwina, First Countess Mountbatten of Burma! So very close in so many ways….

      • BayTampaBay says:

        More on Sasha, Duchess of Abercorn please!

      • Doulton says:

        BayTampaBay, let’s begin with two strands of Sasha Abercorn’s history:

        Count Michael Mikhalovich (known as “Miche Miche”), a Romanov and grandson and cousin of a Tsar married a German girl from the Baden family and there’s a lot of shared blood with Prince Philip. Miche Miche had four children: Lady “Zia” Wernher, and others who would go on to marry Mountbattens or become lovers to Vanderbilts, etc. Lady Zia married the spectacularly wealthy Sir Wernher. They had two daughters: Georgina, Lady Kennard and Myra Butter–born in 1919 and 1925. Georgina was married to Bunny Phillips. Yes, THE Bunny Philips who was a long term playmate of the first Countess Mountbatten of Burma.
        Bunny and Georgina had 4 daughters: the oldest was Sasha, Duchess of Abercorn, and the youngest the current Duchess of Westminster.

        SO: Bunny Phillips is grandfather to Sasha, Duchess of Abercorn and also the major squire of Edwina Mountbatten, first Countess of Mountbatton. The snarls and knots have been entwined in these peerage luminaries since at least the time of Queen Victoria and probably earlier.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        The Lord Ivar Mountbatten and Penny Mountbatten (b. 1966) is another good rabbit hole to go down for a great gossip read.

      • (The OG) Jan90067 says:

        OMG…HOW do you keep it/them all straight???? My head is spinning!

        Gotta say, kinda creeps me out: the Penny born in 1956…she’s MY age, and I can NOT fathom “being with” someone Philip’s age like that *shudder*. It’s like being with your father!

      • A says:

        Queen Alexandra never invited Alice Keppel to her husband’s bedside when he was dying. She gave firm instructions to his comptroller/secretary that Alice Keppel should not be allowed into his rooms, let alone be allowed to enter and make a whole production of her visit, which Alice Keppel was intent on doing. She tried to show up and was politely escorted out, in tears, and later came up with this story as a means to make it seem like she was more accepted and welcomed by Queen Alexandra than was actually the case. The reality was much more humiliating and sad for her to want to spread around as the truth.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      @Doulton – I thought Lady Zia Wernher’s parents. Sasha’s great-grandparents, were Grand Duke Michael and the Sophie of Merenberg, Countess de Torby.

      All these aristos have so many names maybe we are talking about the same people.

      • Doulton says:

        Yes, Grand Duke Mikhail Mikhaioivich was nick-named “miche-miche” (for Michael Michael, I guess). He married Sophie or Merenberg, Countess of Torby. Among their children were Lady Zia Wernher, grandmother of Sasha, Duchess of Abercorn. You have it correct. “Zia” was an old friend of Her Majesty and married into buckets of money. The name Zia has been carried down via the daughter of Lady Edwina Snow, daughter of the 6th Duke of Westminster and Natasha Phillips, daughter of Bunny.

  18. Kalana says:

    Was there more than one mistress at a time? Philip was with Penny for a very long time.

    It’s not like Philip and Elizabeth could get a divorce. What else were they supposed to do?

    • Lady D says:

      Do vows wear off after a certain amount of time? They were married forever.

    • PrincessK says:

      She seems to have been the last one amongst many. It was definitely a real love relationship.

    • February-Pisces says:

      I remember hearing how he was bonking Princess Alexandra (the queens cousin) for like 20 years. I think she is also going to the funeral.

      • PrincessK says:

        Well I heard it was 15 years but you may well be right. Lol! But really poor Queen having to put up with that!

  19. Alexandria says:

    She seems…for lack of a better word, fascinating to me. She looks pretty good and I really like that outfit she’s wearing with the blue tie. Her name is so cute and aristocratic at the same time. Is she really alleged mistress or daughter?

    • Harper says:

      Too pretty to be a Windsor.

    • jbones says:

      Very interesting theory! Could she have been a daughter born outside his marriage? Hmmmmm….strokes chin.

    • Div says:

      Yeah, I’m wondering as Sasha was defn. his mistress (she basically admitted it) and there would have been overlap (then again, Charles overlapped with Camilla and Kanga)…but Sasha didn’t seem to be invited/as familiar as Penny was with the BRF. I know the Queen basically accepted it and polyamory and all that, but to have a long time mistress at a tiny family funeral is an odd choice still…not so much if she’s the lovechild.

      Also, again, anything can happen but as people pointed out in the comment section the class system is even more difficult in the UK and the aristos are very…inbred/tight knit. Apparently Penny’s father was a successful businessman but the real money came after she was born, not before, and so for her to marry into the Mountbattens in the 70s, when marriages to commoners (not only that, but a very new money commoner) was very rare for the top ranks of the aristos…it’s interesting. Also, apparently back in the day there were some comments off the record that he was a “father figure” to her.

      The French press also has long said he fathered two kids on some French actress back in the day, and apparently there were photos….and Phillip went out of his way to visit one of the kids, who ended up being his “godson”, in Beijing where he lived.

    • Roo says:

      I am fascinated by the idea she was a daughter. I went back to look at the photos. They have the same nose and face shape!

    • L84Tea says:

      I did some googling of her images and wow, she is really stunning. And she dresses like a true aristo too. Her scarf collection alone has me green with envy, and I don’t even wear scarves.

  20. Merricat says:

    I do think that Elizabeth understood that a man like Phillip probably needed women on the side to assuage the indignity of having to play consort, never to be king. That generation and their gender expectations—that’s my guess.

    • Cecilia says:

      I think that too tbh. I think it might have frustrated her in the beginning because i have no doubt that she loved him (and he loved her). But i think that after a certain time she was fine with it as long as it was discreet, knowing he would never leave her anyways.

      • Andrea says:

        The last episode of season 2 of the Crown summed up Elizabeth’s attitudes towards the affairs I believe.

    • A says:

      I think she accepted that reality, I don’t think she understood it, nor did she approve. The Queen is fairly religious as a person. I think she far preferred fidelity, like anyone would, and maybe she simply learned to make the best of it.

  21. Kimber says:

    It kills me though that the media has been so circumspect about Penny but foaming at the mouth,rabidly insane over H/M’s “ Service is universal”. Oh the horror of disrespect shown to the queen! It doesn’t even matter how HM feels about Penny- the media has been so mild over it- it’s so a**-backward.

  22. Southern Fried says:

    It’s all just another sign of we are superior to all and do what we want but not-royals, Diana, Meghan, etc. must follow our archaic rules. Eff the monarchy. It’s a slap in the face to all their subjects. Besides Andrew’s twisted proclivities what else are they hiding?

  23. Sofia says:

    I think that at worst, HM has accepted Penny and realised Philip was going to keep companions/mistresses on the side and at best, welcomed them and had a friendship with them. Kanga was another of Charles’ mistress and Diana became friends with her (if only to try and take down Camilla or something)

    • Doulton says:

      Yes, HM has spent quite a bit of time with Penny and Penny’s daughter. Penny is often in her Ascot circle, for example.

    • A says:

      There’s also the fact that Penny Knatchbull is married to the Mountbatten family. On that account alone, she is likely to be close friends with the Windsors, given that they are Philip’s closest, most prominent, and most influential set of relations in Britain.

  24. aquarius64 says:

    Sorry an alleged sidepiece attending the funeral of her late married lover is an insult to the widow, aristo circles not withstanding. This is your life Kate.

    • PrincessK says:

      I am quite sure that Kate and her family must be keenly observing this.

      • Andrea says:

        Kate will be long divorced before this happens if what Hench above says is true. William is so over Kate.

    • A says:

      Two alleged sidepieces–Princess Alexandra was also rumoured at one time to have been involved with Prince Philip.

      The trouble with having aristocratic sidepieces is that the circle is so small–everyone is friends with, or related to, everyone else. When you choose people who are in such close orbit to you at all times, it’s hard to uninvite your spouse’s sidepiece, without making it too obvious that you’ve had some kind of falling out with them, which makes discretion incredibly difficult in the face of all of this, especially if you’re the jealous or vindictive type.

      You can’t reasonably have a funeral for Philip without all of the senior royals present. These people are his generation, and his family. He is related to Princess Alexandra and her siblings through his father. He is related to the Mountbattens/Knatchbulls through his mother. Not inviting them would have been an omission to him.

  25. Heat says:

    If Penny had NOT been invited, then her omission would indicate hard feelings from the Queen…suggesting/confirming that Penny was, indeed, the “other woman”.
    The invite is a smart move. For one thing, Philip would have wanted her there. But it also *suggests* that Penny really is “just a close friend” because the Queen invited her.

  26. LaraW” says:

    My head is spinning from all the names and relationships that seem very intertwined. I just keep seeing a thicket of brambles— you can’t untangle it, you can only hack it to pieces and dig up the roots.

  27. Doulton says:

    I wrote the upshot before but wanted to continue it today.

    I did some research on Penelope Eastwood Knatchbull, Countess Mountbatten of Burma. Her father earned a lot of money but the internet and the peerage have no information at all about her mother. Penny has no siblings listed ever. In her wedding photo from 1979, Knatchbulls and Mountbattens are all over the place but I cannot detect any of her own people.

    The current Countess Mountbatten–Penny– spent a lot of time with Prince Philip and they were very close. Her carriage racing with him helped to keep him alive and vital (from all that I can determine). Also she has not once spoken with the press as far as I know. Lady Pamela Hicks has given a few public interviews which might indicate that she is out of favor (of course Pammy has no money since Patricia’s children sold the lot for almost 7 million).

    Penny was comforted by the royal family when her daughter died and when her husband ran off with somebody named Jenny McNutty–or something like that. She is the type of “stay strong” and avoid the press friend that the royal family must cherish for her discretion. She and Prince Philip shared decades of close friendship.

    Mostly her inclusion will remind me a bit of the way that Queen Alexandra called for Edward VII’s mistress, Mrs. Keppel, to come to his death bed. And that, of course, reminds me that Mrs. Keppel’s great granddaughter is Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall. In the meantime, back in the day, Mrs. Keppel was supported financially by Sir Ernest Cassel who funneled money to her husband, Mr. Keppel. For more fun, Sir Ernest Cassel was grandfather to the first Countess Mountbatten of Burma who owned Broadlands, where Prince Philip and the Queen spent part of their honeymoon. Now it is managed by Penny, Countess Mountbatten.

    Do NOT confuse Philip’s friend, Penny, Countess Mountbatten (b. 1956) with Penny Mountbatten (b. 1966,).

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      Her brother passed away in 2013. Maybe not listed in the peerage. He is noted on wikipedia and this is a link to his obituary. He’d been living here in the US. It’s true it’s hard to find anything on her mother-some list her mother’s maiden as Wood, some as Hood. According to the obit it is Hood. Hope the link comes through. His sister, Lady Brabourne, is listed as a
      survivor.
      https://www.legacy.com/obituaries/aurora-beacon-news/obituary.aspx?n=Peter-Eastwood&pid=164711076

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        I believe the year she was born is 1953, not 1956, Today is her 68th birthday.

      • Doulton says:

        Thank you so much for the link, Agreatreckoning. I appreciate it. It’s good to know. I never would have guessed that he could be found coaching in the Chicago suburbs. The family seemed to be endowed with brains. Peter Eastwood looks a smidge like Norton, Earl Mountbatten of Burne, Penny’s husband.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        yw-Doulton. I think Peter was involved with investments/financial market stuff for his career. Coaching was probably a side job he did out of his love for soccer.

        No idea if he/they are related to the Peter Eastwood that’s with Berkshire Hathaway now-probably not?

    • Elizabeth says:

      Pamela Hicks doesn’t have money? Her children seem to be rolling in it.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Pamela Hicks has written a least two books in the last 10 years that have done fairly well.

        Her husband was David Hicks the very successful international decorator & artist.

        Her son Ashley Hicks is also very successful: “Ashley Louis David Hicks is a British interior design blogger. He is the only son of Lady Pamela Hicks and David Nightingale Hicks. Hicks blogs about architecture and interiors in Europe, the United States, and the United Kingdom. He also has a fabric line for Lee Jofa and furniture lines.”

        India Hicks see link:
        https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a26428767/india-hicks-lady-pamela-hicks-lost-jewelry-bank/

      • Doulton says:

        I think she does have money but I see the frantic need to create more money in some parts of the family: India Hicks, with her 4 or 5 children to support, and Edwina Brudenell, who has a couple of daughters and granddaughters. In the recent ITV interview, I noticed how very shabby Lady Pamela’s desk was. My speculations are crass, however.

      • A says:

        @Doulton, that sort of shabbiness is just poverty cosplay from the upper classes. They dislike overt and public displays of wealth, so their preferred interior design for their living spaces is “cozy but chaotic and messy”. If you read the Tatler’s profiles on aristocratic families, you’ll notice one detail that crops up often in those articles is that these people constantly have dog hair on their furniture, and that their carpets are shabby, etc. It’s how you can tell that these people are aristocrats–when they’re so upper class, they don’t need to know what a vacuum cleaner is a day in their life.

    • AnonAnon says:

      @Doulton: Queen Alexandra didn’t invite Alice Keppel to Edward VII’s deathbed. Alice showed up at the door with a letter that Edward had preemptively written stating his wish that she be allowed to come to him and say goodbye when the time came, and then proceeded to make a giant scene that resulted in her being dragged out of the room once he was dead.

  28. Jen says:

    Imagine having a family only funeral and having slept with 10% of the attendees.

  29. iconoclast59 says:

    How very French of the BRF to invite Penny to PP’s funeral. That being said, I’m glad she gets to attend. I think it’s very savvy, PR-wise. A number of people will interpret this as, “See? It was just an innocent friendship! If it had been anything more, Penny wouldn’t have been invited.”

  30. Carolind says:

    Penny and her husband were very friendly with Charles when he married Diana. Penny was the woman with Diana at a polo match the Saturday before her marriage when Diana broke down in tears. They all also went on a Caribbean holiday the next January when Diana was pregnant and feeling the strain.

    Penny advised Charles not to marry Diana as they had nothing in common.

    At the time their little daughter was ill she was on the balcony at Trooping the Colour and Diana was fussing all over her. Afterwards Penny and husband issued a statement to say that although Diana was very sweet with Leonora as she was with all children, that it had been Prince Charles who had provided the real support and who was devoted to their daughter. So…no love lost there!

  31. Faye G says:

    Maybe QE was grateful to Penny for taking Philip off her hands, so to speak. From reading about him over the years, it seems like he was not the easiest person to get along with. So if she kept him happy and occupied up at Wood farm, maybe that arrangement worked nicely for everyone. I don’t know, it’s clear the aristocrats do things differently from us peasants. Whatever the circumstances, I’m glad they are including her in the funeral, it’s very gracious.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      I think QEII was definitely grateful to Penny for “safely” occupying Phillip’s time for 20= years and watching over him as a primary caregiver during his final years of ill health.

  32. The Other Sarah says:

    Is inviting Penny K also a giant subtweet to Kate that this is how it is, play nice, get used to it, etc.?

    • Monica says:

      Kate, face it, you’re a glorified brood mare!

    • February-Pisces says:

      Penny has been shown quite a lot of respect from them all. She was most likely a ‘companion’ for decades, it’s kinda like she’s fits in with the family.

      I did think about how kate would feel watching the end of a consorts life and whether it would give her some perspective in regards to her own end game.

      I think kate doesn’t see herself as a future ‘consort’ but instead as a future ‘co-sovereign’. She’s not, she will live her life as a supporting role to William.

  33. Elizabeth says:

    It is definitely …. amazing …. to me how Phillip kept it in the family. And then we get these fawning articles from the tabloids on how devoted the queen and Phillip were. So duplicitous.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      I believe that QEII and the Duke of Edinburgh were completely devoted to each other their entire adult lives.

      However, Aristocratic Royal devotion and middle-class Yank devotion are two entirely different concepts.

      • Talia says:

        It’s a very English upper class view of marriage. For examples that are more public, you can look at Jeffrey Archer and Alan Clark. Jeffrey A was and is married to a super clever brunette (she has a PhD and does something complicated involving solar energy) who he appears to be devoted to but he is also well known for seeing multiple women (usually blonde) on the side.

        Alan Clark got cited in a divorce as sleeping with a woman and both of her daughters (all fully consenting and well over the age of consent). His wife’s only public comment was “well what do you expect when you sleep with below stairs types”.

        Phillip had the sense to stick to women who knew the rules and who also had husbands who were not going to run to the press, i.e. women who were not “below stairs types” who might expect more than was on offer.

        The issue with Charles and Camilla was partly Diana being very young and for some reason thinking her marriage would be different to the normal run of aristocratic marriages and partly because while Charles may not have been sleeping with Camilla in the early years of the marriage, he was definitely having an emotional affair with her throughout and was putting her before his wife which isn’t done.

        It isn’t the type of marriage I would like but in reality it’s an old fashioned version of an open marriage and if everyone knows and plays by the same rules, it seems to work well in a lot of cases.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Talia – Was Alan Clarke the dude that made the comment that he felt sorry for Mr. X?X because he had to but his own furniture?

      • A says:

        @Talia, I think the issue with Diana wasn’t that she did not understand how things were. I think the issue was more that she understood, and she didn’t care for it.

        One of her commonly cited motivations for marrying Charles was that he was the only man in the country who would not be allowed to divorce her. I question the accuracy of the quip, but I think the sentiment was accurate for Diana. Diana was a child of divorce, and whether she understood the implications at the time or not, her mother publicly breaking away from her marriage to be with someone else was a huge scandal (and she was punished heavily for it, let’s not forget). But there is some precedent for Diana’s own expectations of her marriage, and why she had so much issue with Charles and Camilla.

        And the other thing, too, is that Philip never publicly neglected the Queen, or his own duties. He was devoted to his family, in his own way. He cared enough to at least consider himself as part of a team with QEII, even if he preferred to spend time around more interesting/glamorous women. He respected her. Charles was a cad, who whinged constantly about how unhappy he was, how jealous he was of his wife stealing his thunder, etc. Things might have gone much differently if he’d at least had a bare minimum of respect for Diana, on literally any level, but he didn’t. I don’t know if Diana would have been okay with Charles continuing to have affairs with other women if he had been nice to her. But I think the fact that Charles failed to make any effort to meet Diana halfway on any level when it came to her own emotional needs was what she couldn’t abide by. A lot can be said about aristocratic marriage arrangements, but at the very least, you shouldn’t be neglecting your wife completely, the way Charles did.

      • Talia says:

        @BayTampaBay – yes, that’s him.

  34. problematicfave says:

    Oh man I can’t wait to see how they insert this (or not) in The Crown. She married into the family in 1979 (per wiki) so that aligns to season 5 maybe?

  35. sassafras says:

    If Meghan had been able to go… who would not have gotten an invite? I’m guessing one of the Germans?

  36. sassafras says:

    I’ve never heard the rumor (?) before about Penny being the DOE’s daughter but I pulled up some photos of them and… I see it. The nose and mouth are identical. And she has a very similar body type to Anne, tall and rangy. Just saying…

    • FicklePickle says:

      Yeah, but half the British aristocracy has practically the same face, and tall and rangy covers the overwhelming majority of the British aristocratic women I am aware of.

      It’s a very limited gene pool…and from what I’ve seen, even when an aristocrat marries an outsider she tends to look like every aristo woman ever.

  37. Amy Too says:

    I feel like cheating or having a mistress/mister in a normal people marriage is probably a much bigger deal and more hurtful generally because you’re the one who is doing your spouse’s laundry, cooking their meals, staying home with the kids while they’re out galavanting, being left at home to deal with the little crises that come up: the toilet is clogged, little Timmy puked all over his bed, someone has to be here from 2-6PM to wait for the cable guy. You do a lot more for your spouse in a regular people marriage, so you might feel more betrayed when they disregard all the things you’re doing for them, don’t recognize the work you’re putting in to the marriage and the family and the house, and decide to go have fun times with someone else and prioritize their sex life over their home life and duties. Like rather than take you to dinner and a movie or a weekend getaway, they’re taking their affair partner and leaving you to deal with the drudgery of home life. This is probably why it’s still super painful to find out your spouse is cheating on you even if you don’t really like them that much anymore and you’re not having sex or feeling romantic towards him. It’s the feeling like you’re being used to do all the not fun stuff for them while they go do the fun stuff with someone else and also are not home to do any not fun stuff for you.

    But in an aristo marriage or a royal marriage, you’re not doing any of that homemaker stuff for your spouse. You, and he, have all your household and child rearing needs met by staff, so no one if feeling resentful and unappreciated when their spouse is out having fun time and you’re stuck home, because you don’t have to be stuck home. You can go out and have your own fun time, even if it’s just with friends or family and not your own lover. And you can pretty much count on your spouse to be there to do the parties and events that you want your spouse to be there for and to even still take you out on dates and spend time with you if that’s what you want, because there’s just a lot more time in the day to do social stuff when you don’t have to work a 9-5 and then pick the kids up at daycare and make your own dinner and put everyone to bed and then plan the next PTO potluck for parent teacher conferences. I think a lot of this aristo carousing is just that they have a lot of social time on their hands where they’re hanging out with other bored, attractive people. And would you really want to even spend all day, everyday with your spouse? They have time that they spend apart on purpose to do their own things and maybe his thing is someone else.

    For the Queen, and for other older or even middle aged women (and men) there might come a time when you’re not really into the sexual aspect of your marriage anymore. My sex drive went down after having children, for example. Or maybe you’re taking medicine that affects your sex drive, or you were just never that into it to begin with. And you don’t really care about that aspect of the relationship and whether your spouse is being exclusively loyal to you in that way because the sex doesn’t represent the type of intimacy you care about. As long as he’s there for the things you do care about like your kids’ and grandkids’ birthday parties and christenings, as long as he’s there when you’re sick or need emotional support, as long as he still spends time being your friend and laughing or doing whatever you do together as a couple like riding or watching old movies, then him having a mistress during his own social time might not matter so much. Especially since that level of resentment and feeling like you’re the one at home holding down the fort doing all the horrible grunt works so that he can go out and have fun sexy times with someone else isn’t a factor. That feeling of having your spouse just expect that you will pick up the slack with the house and kids whenever he’s out prioritizing his d**k is like a slap in the face. But that doesn’t happen so much in aristo/royal marriages. As long as he’s still pulling his weight with the things you care about and being intimate in the ways you do care about, then does his spending time with someone else during your regularly scheduled away time from each other really bug as much? I would think maybe not.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      EXACTLY!

    • candy says:

      THIS! I also think affairs creep up more often in the aristo circles since they have such packed social lives, and the events are very glamorous. I mean, if I were regularly drinking, cavorting, dancing, charity balls, ski trips, Caribbean getaways with a multitude of “friends” I’d known since childhood, where everyone is equally rich, no to mention boring, I think the temptation would be there…Middle class lives are mostly made of work and sleep, lol.

      • Amy Too says:

        I think this might be why it’s a little more difficult for Kate to deal with, too. She’s not really off doing her own thing socially with her own aristo or even non aristo social circle, organizing charity stuff, going to long weekend parties, being invited to the openings of charities and art museums, going on vacation with lots of other wealthy friends, and whatever else. It seems like she doesn’t have a lot of friends and her social acquaintances are people she sees when Will brings her somewhere. He’s doing stuff like going alone to hunting parties or aristo friend weddings by himself while she’s sitting at home alone. She seems to have really walled herself off from the world and the social scene, or she was never really accepted into it as her own person, so she has that extra reliance on her husband for social company and companionship. Like I don’t see her having a friend of any gender that she walks around Norfolk or has dinner with when William is away. We don’t hear about her going on vacations or to overseas weddings and parties on her own without Will, and if she does take a vacation without him it’s just with her family. She’s definitely more of the middle class, stuck at home while her husband galavants type of person, so she’s likely resentful and jealous of his time with others. Plus, I don’t think she and Will share any other type of intimacy to make up for the lack of exclusively loyal sexual intimacy, and they don’t appear to have any special hobbies or things that just they do together. He’s not even fulfilling her basic needs of being there for the important things she needs him to be there for, like the first time she met the Queen, or her kid’s first Easter, or George’s first family vacation. He’s not really holding up his end of the bargain.

        And I definitely agree that the huge amount of luxurious leisure time probably helps lead to affairs. If you don’t work and don’t have anywhere to be or anything constructive to do most of the day, you can only spend so much time with your own spouse. After awhile, you want to hang out with other people either on your own, or with your spouse in a group, and you need these lavish and exciting things to entertain you since your normal day to day life is already pretty lavish and you get as much relaxing time as you want. A long weekend reading by the fire up north at the cabin isn’t going to cut it. So you’re in exotic locations, dressed up and looking your best, drinking, maybe drugging, do romantic and sexy things like swimming in the ocean at your private beach at midnight with your attractive friends…. I can see how it happens.

    • Tronica says:

      @Amy Too, this sounds so right. Thank you for explaining and sharing your emotional intelligence with us. I wonder how this will work out with Megan and Harry over the years.

  38. Kkat says:

    Penny being the DOE’s daughter would make a lot of sense, I had read that a few times before now.

  39. Gabby says:

    What does the AP Style Guide think of the term “Sidepiece”, or “Goomah”?

  40. A says:

    This list makes sense. I was reading the Tatler yesterday when the official list of invitees was released, and one of the articles talked a little bit about Philip’s German relations who were invited. There was an interesting line in there, about how Philip was not able to invite his sisters to his wedding, so he wanted to make sure that they would otherwise be represented at all of his other major life events, like his funeral.

    There were other articles too, that talked about how for the European royal contingent, Philip was the bridge between them and the British royals in the Queen’s generation. He cared about his side of the extended family a lot, and kept up his correspondence with them, even into his final years. The unfortunate thing though, with having aristocratic/royal German relations, is that very few of them tend to be far removed from the Nazis as far as their family histories go. I think there needs to be a discussion abt how Philip’s sisters married Nazis, and likely supported/were Nazis themselves. But this was a man who didn’t have much of a home, or a family life, until he married and had children with the Queen, so I think the added detail of his sisters descendants being present at the funeral is, if nothing else, a testament to how closely he held his remaining relations.

    The Tatler also briefly mentioned that there were a lot of European royalty who were close to Philip who, if they had the chance, would have tried to make the trip, but couldn’t, like King Constantine of Greece, who Philip was apparently a close friend of. It’s interesting that, even more than the Queen, it’s Philip, through both his Battenberg and Greek relations, who stands as a testament to Queen Victoria and King Christian’s respective nicknames as the grandmother and FIL of Europe.

    I wonder how the Tory supporters who support the royal family square away Philip’s entirely European background with their Brexiteerism. Even the monarchy they hold up as the epitome of Britishness is ultimately German/Belgian/Danish/Greek at its very core. But hypocrisy and double standards are a way of life for these people, after all, so w/e.

  41. The Recluse says:

    That AP tweet was catching all the sarcasm when it came out.
    Poor Middletons…after all that noise in the press. Sigh.

  42. Roseberry says:

    My question how is Penny Knatchbull able to retain her title of Countess Mountbatten of Burma when the UK has no claim over Burma/Myanmar and haven’t since the 40s?

    • FicklePickle says:

      Because the title is based on the letters patent from the Queen, not from the actual holding of the physical region. Until and unless someone amends the letters patent granting the title it will not change.

      The fun part is going back to, like, the Tudor period and earlier and seeing whichever monarch of England it is throwing tantrums about being the rightful King of France, and the Dukedom of Normandy and so on. That whole snarl, and the Norman conquest, is likely the root of Englands’ traditionally, er…strained relationship with France.

    • A says:

      The title Earl Mountbatten of Burma is a victory title awarded originally to Louis Mountbatten, who is Penny Knatchbull’s grandfather-in-law. It was given to him as a recognition of his efforts as Supreme Allied Commander of the Southeast Asian Command during WW2, especially in the recapture of what is today Myanmar (then called Burma) from the Japanese. The fighting in Southeast Asia during WW2 was brutal, but the victories won there were instrumental to the British in stopping the Japanese advance into India, which Myanmar shared a border with at the time. It doesn’t actually mean that the person who has it has a claim to the actual geography of it, it’s more so a recognition of the recipient’s victory as a commander on the battlefield.

      Another notable example of an aristocrat who received a whole laundry list of such titles is the Duke of Wellington. The 1st Duke of Wellington was one of Britain’s most famous military commanders. He defeated Napoleon at Waterloo, and was awarded the title of Prince of Waterloo, by the king of the Netherlands, and that was just one of the victory titles he held. The title of Prince of Waterloo is still held by his descendent today, the current Duke of Wellington. This doesn’t mean they actually have any claim to the actual municipality of Waterloo, which is today in Belgium. It just means, their ancestor fought and won a war there, which was significant enough for their victory to be recognized by a title.

      • Roseberry says:

        Thank you for clarifying A, that does make more sense now. I do still think the title has a colonial ring to it but so do a lot of things about the royals.

  43. Grouchie says:

    Princess Alexandra was also, supposedly, a long-term ‘companion’ also.

  44. equality says:

    Hello Magazine says that Penny attended as a representative for her husband.

  45. Becks1 says:

    Just because there was buzz over the last week that Edo and Jack wouldn’t be included because they didn’t know Philip that well – the only grandchildren-in-law invited would be Kate and Mike Tindall (who apparently knew him pretty well.) It’s not a surprise overall, it just is contrary to what was rumored.

  46. Enny says:

    Duke of Gloucester and Duke of Kent made the cut, but their wives, Duchess of Gloucester and Princess Michael of Kent, who knew PP for a LONG time, didn’t make the cut. So it is somewhat surprising that Bottle Boy and the Mozz are in… (loving it and stealing it, @Harper) :)

    But glad to see that Queenie is sticking it to the CU Next Tuesday of Kent! 😈

  47. CJ says:

    My own headcanon around this is that the Queen or her new Lord Chamberlain took one look at the sugary “Kate will make the cut because she’s so important” faff out there and went for a hard nah on that, so made sure B&E’s husbands made the list – to support them but also send a message.

    I do find it interesting some of the competency and shaper replies around the funeral with regards to the Royals constant drams and press faff – the Queen’s new Lord Chamberlain started in role on 1 April. Found the below in a BBC article just an interesting nugget of info:
    “Confirmation of the Queen’s audience with Lord Parker came in the Court Circular, the official record of royal engagements.

    It reported: “The Lord Parker of Minsmere had an audience of The Queen today, kissed hands upon his appointment as Lord Chamberlain and received from Her Majesty the Wand and Insignia of Office and the Badge of Chancellor of the Royal Victorian Order, when The Queen invested him with the Insignia of a Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order.”

    The Lord Chamberlain’s office, led by the Queen’s Comptroller Lieutenant Colonel Michael Vernon, is tasked with the practical side of Prince Philip’s funeral.

    But in overall charge is Lord Parker, who succeeds the Earl Peel after his retirement following more than 14 years in post.”

  48. BayTampaBay says:

    Neither did the Duchess of Kent make the cut.

    Princess Michael of Kent and Katherine, Duchess of Kent are two different people.

    QEII was close to Katherine Kent in their younger years.

  49. The Hench says:

    The Duchess of Kent – Katharine Worsley as was – has not been seen in public for many years. There was speculation about some kind of breakdown but no real details.

    ETA the BBC talked about hospitalisation from “nervous strain” plus Epstein Barr and ME according to Wikipedia…

  50. Gabby says:

    Aww Princess Michael of Kent. How we will miss your racist brooches.

  51. Eve says:

    Given that you are unhappy about everything that has been written about Harry regardless if it is true I am surprised you are willing and ready to believe everything about other members rather than the press making things up.

  52. Lady D says:

    Was that necessary, Eve?

  53. pottymouth pup says:

    I’m so confused by this. Even when you don’t know the decedent well, if that person was important to your spouse as one would normally expect a grandparent to be, the purpose of attending would be to support their spouse who is mourning the loss of their grandfather

  54. Becks1 says:

    What on earth are you talking about? I’m not unhappy with everything written about Harry. calm down and take a seat Eve.

    I said there was “buzz” not that it was fact. And it was from some relatively reputable sources. I’m not saying they shouldn’t attend, just explaining why there’s a bit of “oh so they are going.”

    Lordy.

  55. Splinter says:

    pottymouth pup
    In normal times supporting your spouse at grandparent’s funeral would go without a question, but there is a limit of 30 persons. There surely must have been some old aristo friends of Philip to whom this would have meant a lot more.

  56. Jaded says:

    @Eve – that was pretty harsh. Becks1 has been a knowledgeable commenter on this site for a long time and always has a good take on things. Plus she gets along well with all of us.

  57. Becks1 says:

    Aw thanks Tessa! I love all my celebitchies!

  58. Kkat says:

    Eve is a Meghan hater so this is typical. She frequently concern trolls. and sometimes flat out trolls.
    I read every article and ALL the comments and Becks1 is nothing like you said.
    Becks1 is one of the commenters I look forward to seeing’s point of view on things.