Ken Wharfe really hates Prince William

Prince William

Ken Wharfe really hates Prince William

by katemiddletonreview112 Comments on Ken Wharfe really hates Prince William

I was going to do a good old fashioned royal round up today, then I decided to do a Kate-related article round up since I didn’t have a ton of time, but then I went down an internet rabbit hole of Ken Wharfe related-articles so now the royal round up will happen tomorrow and today you get an article about Ken Wharfe‘s hate-on for Prince William. There is a new article making the rounds with quotes from Ken Wharfe, former bodyguard to Princess Diana, criticizing the British Royal Family – particularly Prince William. This is not the first time Wharfe has “slammed” William; he has been doing so for years.

Prince William pre-job interview

First the Express article where Ken Wharfe “slams” the royals.

    On the Monarchy: “When I was a protection officer for Diana I was a monarchist because I thought the royals were good for the country. But I’ve come to the conclusion that they’re not a very nice group of people. […] There’s a danger that unless the Family is seen to be achieving something then people like Corbyn and the republican movement will become every stronger. […] People like Prince Andrew and the Duke of Kent should go. Ultimately I see the British royals going the way of European monarchies, but I’m not certain that Prince Charles wants to slim the operation down that much.”
    On William and Harry: “[William] was always a sly little boy, and now he’s become arrogant and spoilt. I hear from people who work for William that he can be very difficult. I liked Harry better and I feel sorry for him because he was never really able to engage in his military career. But I think he’s the answer to the family’s longevity, and I bet if there was a vote on who should accede to the throne; the people would go for Harry. I’m not sure the next generation will even care about the royal family at all. They may simply become irrelevant.”

The sentiment behind these quotes is nothing new, in fact, it’s been building to this for years.

In 2012, Wharfe said of William: “This nonsense about normality, Prince William saying he wants to do the gardening at Anglesey and the washing up, it’s a little naive. […] they are not leading normal lives, they are high-profile members of the Royal Family.”

In February 2014, of William and Harry’s hunting trip in Spain (with Jecca Craig) days before giving anti-poaching speeches and attending a wildlife conference, Wharfe said: “From my experience, royal courtiers would have had prior knowledge of the Spanish visit. Failing to advise against the wild boar shoot is symptomatic of the sycophantic culture that surround the royal princes. If Prince William is to ‘spearhead’ the global protection of wildlife, then he has to be consistent.”

Then in August 2014, Wharfe said: “William’s new job is the latest PR stunt from the royal advisers, coupled with the prince’s own quest to be seen to be ‘normal’. […] William, his wife and his brother are experts in the field of royalty, and however much they display their loom bands, they are not normal. He should listen to his grandmother, get out there, use his position and raise money for his charities in a royal way – and not rely on stunts seemingly encouraged by sycophants.”

So the evolution is: William is naive in his quest to be “normal”, William’s advisers are sycophantic idiots indulging William’s naive quest to be normal, William is arrogant and spoiled and difficult to work with.

That seems like a reasonable escalation of frustration with William. In fact that’s probably very similar to the evolution of our frustration with William. Wharfey’s totally one of us!

Wharfe published a book about Diana in 2002 which caused a kerfuffle among the royals, public, and other officers, and since then he’s given lots of quotes to different media outlets on the subject of the royals – particularly William, Kate, and Harry. Wharfe seemingly makes his living off of talking about the royals.

I wonder what prompted this outburst. Wharfe has clearly had negative feelings toward William in particular for a long time but what happened recently that made him go, “Yep, I’m a republican”, and share these quotes with the press? Why now, what happened? And as much as I like the idea of Harry taking the throne instead of William, why is Wharfe suddenly all pro-Harry (when he hasn’t been before)?

I do agree with some of his points, though – both the new ones and the older ones. I agree that the royals need to be seen as actively contributing something to society or else they will become irrelevant and the monarchy will die, and that it’s mostly up to the younger royals (William, Kate, and Harry) to make that happen, especially going forward. I also agree that William’s desire to be “normal” is naive at best and that his staff fail at their jobs most of the time. Oh, and, at least from the outside, William seems to be spoiled and prone to tantrums.


Websites: Kate Middleton Review Meghan Markle Review

112 thoughts on “Ken Wharfe really hates Prince William”

  1. “Sly” is a uniquely cutting choice of word to describe a child. That one word paints quite a picture.

    I agree with everything Wharfe says. He always struck me as a decent bloke & I suspect he still has contacts within the vipers nest of KP.

  2. Thanks for sharing. Being a royal critic is the flip side of being a royal staff biographer – royalty has to exist in order for it to be relevant. The interesting point is that it’s not about the people of the UK and what they need – it’s about what the royals need to keep their status. One could argue Kate can’t handle the job seeing as she’s out and about in the UK looking rough and buying $12 tablecloths. Is that really how you want your leaders to be seen? Do you see any other world leaders being shown in that context? No you do not. It’s going to be real interesting when the Queen passes. William may get his wish – he may become normal.

    1. Very interesting comment indeed. Did totally make me think. I often find myself scratching my head at W & K’s odd behavior through the years and wondering why they don’t act like they care to be taken more seriously like other royal figures and leaders.
      With all of the Queen’s experience, you would think more sense of duty and work ethic would have rubbed off on William and in return would reflect onto Kate. Instead they have produced an extremely private life with duties kept to the bare minimum. Their very anticipated children, prince and princess of the UK, have been hidden away from public view like ths they live in the 1600’s still.

    2. Letizia goes out shopping, dressed down so she isn’t photographed much.

      https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/0a/b7/00/0ab70074c9b7afed2f58b43d8dfa3e3f.jpg

      She works hard, is well-informed and appropriately dressed when at work. Felipe and Letizia go out on date nights to the movies or to concerts, in every day clothes, and are mostly left alone. I don’t think that is a problem, having those aspects of everyday life instead of being spoon-fed caviar every night, because they are seen to be hard-working representatives of their nation when they are at work.

      2. I’d like to point out that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are,internationally far more popular than the Spanish royal couple.Media interest in them is much greater,whether that level of media interest is appropriate or not is another question.
        Also,Letitzia is a queen and Felipe is a king.They naturally have more royal duties than the Duke and Duchess.

        1. Yes, but Queen Leti was doing engagements almost daily even when she was not queen so her work ethic has always been stellar. They don’t hide everything from the press about their precious babies and outings with their friends of which Kate has none. They truly have a common touch unlike the Cambridges. This is what I was referring to.

          2. Queen Letitzia was an award winning journalist before she married into the royal family,so her work ethic was always more impressive.Got to give her credit there.
            As for the press,I think they get enough paparazzi shots of the Cambridge’s children.They will get more as the children grow older.

          3. I don’t agree. I think the more they showed their children to the public, the less intrusive the paparazzi would be. They are ridiculous with their anti-press measures. If they wanted to live normally without having any photos taken of them or their children, then William should abdicate. His position merits some level of public access and scrutiny. The people’s taxpayer’s dollars support them. Like it has been said many times before, they want their perks without the work or accepting being a public figure and future King.

            Do you notice KMR’s next post with the Monaco’s (as I call them) showing off their adorable children, or the Swedes allowing everyone to watch the baptism of their children, CP Victoria and Daniel sharing photos and her with the public, and Queen Leti did the same even when the children were small as did Princess Mary. CP Victoria had terrorist threats against her life recently, and she doesn’t impose ridiculous rules like the Cambridges. IMO, that is why the other Euro royals are liked so much more.

            Oh and yes, Leti is impressive. Kate would learn so much from her; she has her chance now as they are coming to the UK for a state visit in March. It’s really a shame she never really worked and was at William’s beck and call at all times. Her parents supported this lifestyle (to get the ring)–so the idea of work is foreign to her (and she seems to be allergic to it.)

            But, certainly, everyone has their right to their opinion so I hope you don’t take this as attacking you because I most surely am not and don’t want you to think so 🙂

  3. I agree with you KMR, what is Ken’s motive for coming forward with his opinions now? I agree that while William might be all those things and more, I’m not overly fond of Mr. Wharfe. As much as he talks about the monarchy becoming irrelevant, it seems to me that Mr. Wharfe is more worried about his own relevancy and his ability to earn a buck (or pound) at the expense of those he was once sworn to protect. Personally I take whatever Mr Wharfe or Jessica Hays say with a grain of salt, neither of them has had any contact with W&K for years probably so they really don’t know them now, only how they were many years ago.

    Now I can understand a bit better why William, Kate and Harry have a hard time letting their guards down. Can you imagine laying in bed at night wondering if the time you acted silly or said the wrong thing or were just being yourself, will turn up many years later on the front page of the papers?

  4. If there are no Royalties in Uk , we’ll never get to see the royal tiaras & jewelleries be worn because they’ll be in museums or be auctioned off. There won’t be any curtsies or bowing s ‘cos these royals will be just normal citizens. I won’t miss Williams’s & Kate’s attitude & laziness but I’ll miss the splendor & beauty of these historic jewelleries being worn especially those TIARAS!!! William & Kate don’t have that magical aura of Royalty. I’ve seen those royal tiaras put on display in the museum. They’re not as beautiful as when certain special royal ladies wear them which make the historical links of these tiaras become alive & relevant. Again, I miss, miss, miss Diana……

    1. I agree. I was fortunate enough to view the Diana exhibit a few years ago. Her wedding dress and tiara was in display, among other things. I sat there with tears in my eyes as it was a beautiful creation, butit did not fully capture her youth and vitality.

      1. Oh, Rhiannon, I agree. I saw the Diana exhibit, too. It moved me to tears, like you.
        She was a shining star in the Royal Family and worked tirelessly to help others. She really showed her care. Yes, she had problems, but who doesn’t? Yet, she was true to the people who loved her so much.

        It is hard for me to understand how William can be so dismissive of the hard work his Grandparents have done. They sacrificed a more normal way of life and were and are devoted to the people. If William has any love and respect for them and his father, how can be not be more of a hard-working Royal? I just don’t understand.

        We all have our crosses to bear in life. We all must make sacrifices, but most adults do what they need to do, not always what they want. Harry is far more relevant a Royal for many. William? It’s hard to figure him out. Kate, too.

        As for the first poster. I agree that “sly” as a word to describe a child is not pretty. What could have motivated such a choice in words?

        1. Trying to edit my post, but everytime I hit the edit button — nothing.
          So, please let me add, that William is letting his late Mum down and by choosing to be so irrelevant. He strikes me as a man who cannot put his anger and grief to rest. Of course, he lost his Mum when he was so young. Of course, that pain will stay with him, but to lead a healthy life, he needs to move past the pain. He needs to honor his Royal heritage and lead a life she would be proud of. It would take courage to denounce his future, but as others have stated, it has been done. William wants all the perks of Royalty and all the supposed perks of the ordinary life, too.

          1. It is ‘fun’ to be ‘normal’ when you can garden one afternoon. If the entire garden is your responsibility, along with a full time job, the fun may start to feel a little more like work.

            I don’t understand the W&K are “experts in the field of royalty” comment from Mr. Wharfe. They look far less expert and seem to be making a royal mess of their image to many in the press and public. The old saying about never getting a second chance to make a first impression works in this case. Among many, W&K may have to put in hard work for years, stop the bad attitudes and listen to competent advisors in order to have opinions change about the Cambridge couple.

            I think these two have stepped in a large area of quicksand and better bail themselves out in lightening fashion or these two will be in trouble in the next few years. If HM and PP die in the next ten years and these two have not changed, I cannot expect the public to have positive feelings about William being the next in line.

            I wish more info would get leaked about W&K, including more from Wharfe. I have been a Diana fan, but wonder how D&C parented William as a child. I am not parent blaming, because very good parents can still struggle with certain children, but William seems to have some real problems. If Ken could see Will as sly, did his parents see this same negative characteristic in him as well?

      2. I also went to the Diana Exhibit when it was in Australia and I literally had to be dragged away from her clothes and the wedding gown in tears. I kept on thinking of each item that she wore. I am with you IDA I still miss Diana, she was not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but she did do her duty very well.

        2. I went to the Diana exhibit in kentucky. It was beautiful, but sad. I still can’t believe how many years have passed. PD was one of a kind, a real humanitarian, and a true star.

    2. Actually this is untrue. Google the royal collection. This is a state dept that has collected centuries worth of royal art, jewellery and whatnot. Anything that belongs to the crown will is part of the royal collection even if the current royals wear them. 3/4 of the tiaras (and jewels and much that is attributed to HM/BRF) that the royals wear, especially HM, are part of the royal collection. That’s why HM’s personal wealth was revised down to only a quarter billion pounds from the highs of multiple billions. The extra sums used to include all the state owned property that she enjoys or holds in trust for the nation.

      The royal collection has permanent and temporary exhibitions all the time, and they can’t seem to touch even half of what they have in their archives.

      And that’s before you touch upon the state properties which include the Palace’s and the crown jewels. Crown Jewels are on permanent display at the tower of London except for when HM has to open parliament and a few pieces are shipped to westminster for her to wear.

      All the palaces that are open all year round eg Hampton Court, Kew, Holyrood, KP have permanent and temporary exhibitions showcasing some of what they have in their archives.

      As for wedding dresses, there is an annual wedding dress exhibition that has all the royal brides wedding dresses except for Diana’s dress. The earliest dress in that collection is Princess Charlotte’s dress. She was the daughter of George IV. It’s a beauty. The latest addition to the collection is Kate’s dress. Diana’s dress belongs to William and Harry, inherited on their 30th birthday, together with all her personal effects. We may see it in the royal collection.

  5. Did Ken Wharfe not sign a non-disclosure agreement? Why is he be allowed blabbing the past like this? Same thing with every major RPO or staff that sells out?

    2. If there was one, he broke it a long time ago. His book on Diana came out in 2002. But it’s possible he signed one and somehow hasn’t broken it. Dickie Arbiter wrote a book about the Queen last year or this year and I remember something about him working around the NDA he signed.

      1. That is just heart breaking….to have someone you trusted suddenly spill tea about your personal life. Absolutely terrible. They should make these NDAs more water tight.

  6. Let me first say that there’s going to be a lot of shade thrown in my response here. And sarcasm.

    I am so over this normal thing. They are royals. They have a rich bloodline steeped with pageantry and history. William will never be William Middleton. He needs to step it up. Do we really want him to be seen selling hair creams on television? Do we want to see the Catherine Black Pump collection? No. This is why I can’t with Fergie. As a person, I love her. But it hurts my heart to see her sell teas, Weight Watchers, etc. It’s crass. Yes, she needs the money, but she’s now normal and must do so. William needs to face his destiny. How many of us know our destiny at birth? None. He knew from day one. If he can’t and won’t, then he needs to step aside and take his family. William is spoiled and over indulged by the royal sycophants. He uses Diana’s death as an excuse. We all miss her, but darn it, it’s been almost 20 years.

    We want our royals to be relatable. I was tickled when I learned that Kate likes the same $5 bottle of lotion as me. But, do I want to think of them as being just like me? No. They won’t and they won’t ever be. Yea, it’s nice to see them out and about. I don’t mind the sighting in a gas station (like when Dan, Vic, Mette-Marit, and don’t Haakon were sighted this year). But that is where normal stops.

    As far as Ken is concerned, he’s one of many who have sold their story. Dickie Arbiter, Patrick Jephson, Stephen Barry, and the list goes one. I think where there is smoke, there’s fire. Not one person who worked for the Firm has said that William is a nice guy. He is arrogant. The queen once said “I have to be seen to believed.” Same goes for William. But the words about him have to be be believed as he is work shy. My last dig is that he is quick to say “I am a Prince “, yet wants to be normal. Get outta here.

    Sorry for my rant, KMR. Thank you for sharing this post.

    1. It’s a fine line that the royals need to walk between being relatable and but still special. For instance, years ago stories came out about how the Queen keeps her breakfast cereal in Tupperware containers and how during her stay at Balmoral she will host a bbq and do the washing up afterwards. Two totally normal things, things all of us can relate too the difference I believe is that the Queen is able to keep the mystery of the monarchy alive by never pretending she is something she is not. She like William grew up with servants (staff as she now calls them), she grew up knowing that she would inherit a job that she didn’t particularly want but unlike William she didn’t try to hide from that, she accepted her destiny and moved forward. Imo, William has not accepted his destiny and struggles with that. I was hoping after their marriage that Kate would be able to help William accept this and become more open to it but after 4+ years my hopes in this area have faded. If they continue to hammer on about being normal, being King and a pilot and complaining about privacy they will stripe the monarchy of all it’s mystery, all that makes it special and at that point why should we bother to keep it.

      2. Actually your comment reminds me of a rare interview given by HM. She stated about how she had to mature into the role by full realisation of her responsibilities and that being a royal is a job for life.

        https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDd7I8V38e8

        Such an amazing woman she is. W&K do not understand this concept of “job for life”. They want the commoner life of not having to deal with royal responsibilities, and only resort into royal power for the luxurious life, security, and of course the power to oppress media and public not to bother them.

        1. You can be relatable without having to shed your aura of mystery or living a totally open book. For all of their wealth and privilege, charitable work is going to be their only saving grace. That will be their life’s work so let’s stop the charade of piloting and other garbage that they pretend to do to look human and accessible. Stop the BS, be genuinely engaged in your charities, and show real interest and compassion. Only then will you get the respect you deserve.

    2. I know what you mean, the whole thing is unfathomable. William had the best living example (sorry PC) in Diana of how to have normal experiences balanced with the duties of royal life, and the importance of his role and the important difference he can make. She brought him up visiting the sick, shaking hands with people everywhere, listening and talking, and then taking a trip to Disney World so he could have some personal fun. He knows what to do. I’m wondering if Ken blames the Midds for taking Will in like Harry Potter and encouraging his Voldemort phobia–Voldemort being the press. In Will’s defense, he can’t ever really trust anyone, not even his father. Diana was probably the only person he could really believe had his back. PC loves him, but PC has waited a lifetime to be king and isn’t going to stand by to be passed over.
      This year was supposed to be a good one PR-wise with Jason taking the helm. It’s been IMO a disaster. Someone needs to be hired that isn’t going to be Will’s buddy, but a professional there to help W&K succeed.

      1. A good PR falck can only do so much if the client isn’t co-operative – and I don’t think William is. Kate, on the other hand, has actually tried – especially with doing a speech. It wasn’t good but she tried even though she’s very obviously terrified of public speaking on the larger stage that a member of the RF inhabits.

        Kate’s public image is so bland and vapid that I can’t really muster any strong feelings about her. Mostly I pity her because she neglected having her own life and taking opportunities to grow as a person, all in the pursuit of a spoiled brat. She neglected those experiences that would actually have stood her in good stead for the role she pursued.

        William, on the other hand, just comes off as glib, arrogant and entitled. He just rubs me the wrong way. I don’t know him and he may be very different than how he comes off, but to me he makes a very bad first impression. There are always those people that ding the “jerk-o-meter”, even when we don’t know them. I can’t really explain why, they just do.

        1. ArtHistorian-usually, I understand where you are coming from, but where Kate is concerned, I think you must have an extremely kind heart. I don’t think she neglected having her own life or missed opportunities to grow as a person, for any reason other than being Will’s wife was her only desire in life. After the break-up, she made a fool of herself (IMO) trying to win Will back in quick fashion. If the break-up continued; Kate would be Pippa! At her age, she can evolve and grow within her marriage, but for some reason she remains a boring and lazy woman. I guess my opinion is based on how lazy she comes across to me. If she was hardworking, this is something so ingrained in ones personality, doing nothing for over ten years would make a true ‘worker’ bonkers.

      2. I think William would be sly and pouty, even if Diana were still alive. That’s his personality, we’ve heard many different people comment on that from the time he could toddle around. Plus, he had his mother wrapped, I don’t know what she would have done to change his attitude, or if she would have been able to do anything until it was too late for him to save face. It’s too late now. By all accounts, this dude thinks the sun shines out his own ass so brightly, you’d get a wicked tan just walking behind him;)

      1. I agree with everything you ladies have said. William needs to surround himself with people who will do their jobs professionally and not tell him just what he wants to hear. But that is not going to happen because I think that you are either all for Wills or gone. As for Kate, I am over her games with the media, the clothes , the HAIR Maybe if William had married a more forceful personality things would be different but again he went with someone who would worship the ground he walks on and not challenge him on anything.

        1. I think Jecca Craig would have been that person. Wasn’t it odd that she got married under such hush circumstances? No one wrote a thing except for a little tweet from Tanna. I am sure William was not happy.

          2. Yes, Laura! Jecca is married. She married some London scientist and they are living in London, I believe. The details were totally hush hush. Normally, that stuff would come out, but I think William protects her…

  7. I wonder what Ken Wharfe’s motivation is. Ken Wharfe took part in a documentary called William’s Women. I can imagine William was sly as a child. However with a doting and loving mother and a father who was not really a role model for William, and I say that Prince Charles was around just his behavior that was not a role model because he didn’t love Diana. It must be so hard seeing parents being distant with each other. I doubt Jessica Hay is close friends with Kate because she was indiscreet. Is sly redeemable by the way?

    1. I agree.

      What is the motivation? These are definitely things that have been out there for a long time. Sounds to me like he is just trying to stay relevant by keeping his name next to William’s in the media.

      1. Re staying relevant: perhaps Wharfe has seen the tide change so drastically against William and for Harry that he has joined the bandwagon in order to stay relevant. Like, Whatfe says whatever the public most wants to hear regarding the royals.

    2. The first thing that came to mind when I read Mr. Wharfe’s comment that William was “sly” as a child is all of my beloved L.M. Montgomery books, where the heroine’s all got unfairly labeled “sly” by various old maidish aunties. 😀 Super random, but gave me a chuckle.

    3. “New Idea” magazine often quote Jessica Hay as their source in articles on Kate and William. The latest one is where Jessica is quoted as saying that William and Kate are going to announce at Christmas to their families that they will be trying for another child in 2016. Of course the cover implies the baby is already on the way!

  8. Does anyone believe that he could be the mouthpiece of Charles’ camp so that his son might get it together? I know William hates hearing someone saying that Harry should be King.

    1. I think it’s definitely something along those lines. It’s either a guilt William and Kate into getting out there and working or set up Harry as King Henry IX.

      Personally I’d prefer the latter.

      1. Agreed. I believe that it’s both probably. Getting the public ready for the possibility of Harry as King if William isn’t up to the task IMO.

        And yes, I would love to see Harry as King. He would be great at it. I know he doesn’t want to do it(or so we think)–but he’s the man for the job.

          2. King Edward VIII wanted to be a commoner to marry Wallis Simpson, and he was brave enough to give up his crown and the rights of his possible future descendants from the line of succession. William wants so much to live as a commoner, would he be man enough to give up his position? Haha, no way.

            Btw, I wonder, in case of William’s abdication, can they still live off public funds? Lets say Prince Harry assumes the title of PoW, will he or King Charles be obliged or allowed to still support WK from public funds? Or should WK survive on their own (e.g. from the money Diana left William or perhaps latch themselves to the Middletons)? I don’t think William’s 62K salary would be able to support their spoiled lifestyle (provided he still works there). Can’t imagine they work for PP either (William Wales, Marketing Director of Party Pieces… ?).

          3. Edward was a Nazi sympathizer and so was Wallis Simpson. Edward was forced to abdicate in fear he would hand Britiain over to Germany.

            No, William would not be allowed to live off the public funds should he abdicate. He would take whatever wealth he had (inherited from Diana and the QM) and leave.

          4. Well are we ready for Queen Pippa? Rumors are flying off the handle and it’s trending on facebook that Pippa and Harry have been secretly dating for about 3 months. I don’t believe this! Can’t be true! But yeah the rumors are being thrown all about!

          5. KMR is right about Edward VIII. When the FBI archives were opened a lot of very damning evidence came out about him.

            He was deeply mistrusted by his own government because he was quite overt in his Nazi sympathies – and so were Mrs. Simpson. (that wasn’t extraordinary in and of itself because many members of the British aristocracy had Nazi sympathies before the outbreak of the war). No monarch has been soo deeply distrusted by his own government since James II – and he was deposed.

          6. Mia, Harry could never be Prince of Wales. It is always for the eldest son of the monarch, so Harry not being the oldest would not get it. I don’t know if he would be given Duke of Cornwall in this hypothetical scenario…

          7. Sorry I have to reply here since there is no reply button at the assigned places to answer.

            KMR and ArtHistorian, thanks for the info. I never knew about the Nazi files of Edward VIII, and finally did my reading. Found the FBI files now on internet to read on the bed tonight (http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/jun/29/research.monarchy). Not a surprise since BRF was quite strongly tied to German Nazi, but never knew that the Nazi made use of Wallis to access confidential files on Edward’s table.

            Ellie, of course I knew that. But we were talking about the hypothetical abdication of William or any future kings, I am curious to know if they could still receive financial support from the royal family (in this case, I took example of Charles shall he be king and in case of William’s abdication, Harry would be PoW). I have not seen any law or regulation concerning financial support of abdicated royal, including in the Abdication Act. And according to KMR, they will be deserted from any financial support by the royal family, even if the King and PoW are his own father and brother.

          8. @Ellie:

            If the government were to remove William and his children from the line of succession, they would jump through whatever legal hoops they need to, and create whatever laws they need to, in order to make Harry the Prince of Wales and Duke of Cornwall. They would not allow William to receive the Duchy money if he were removed from the line of succession. It does not matter what the current laws state, they will make new ones.

          9. Actually Mia, I would say the reverse. Edward VIII wanted Wallis to be Queen but his governments refused to allow a divorcee and adulterer marry the King. He loved her, so he abdicated. William is the reverse. He wants to be “normal,” not King. As for the financial arrangements, Edward’s brother, King George VI, paid Edward an allowance out of the Duchy of Lancaster funds b/c the Government refused to include the Windsors on the Civil List. William has about £10 million and will probably inherit more from Charles. Were he to leave the line of succession, I would not worry for a second about his financial situation.

          10. @Ellie, Actually it’s the reverse. The Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester is the title given to the eldest (surviving) son in the line of succession. The Dukedom of Cornwall can only be inherited by the eldest child. But if they remove William and his descendants from the line of succession, I am pretty confident that Harry would become both as for all intents and purposes of the line of succession, William and his descendants would be considered dead.
            In 1892, Prince Albert Victor, the eldest son of the then-Prince and Princess of Wales (Prince Albert Edward and Princess Alexandra) died. His next eldest son, George, became Duke of York upon marriage the next year and in 1901, when Edward ascended the throne as Edward VII, George became first Duke of Cornwall and York and then Prince of Wales.

        2. There are also rumors that Prince Harry is secretly with Kitty Spencer?! So is it Pippa or Kitty? That’s actually what’s trending in the tabloids.

          1. Harry and Kitty Spencer are, what, first cousins. That would be illegal here in the U.S.; I don’t what the laws are in the UK.

          4. It is legal in many US states to marry your first cousin! There are families throughout the US that keep it in the family big time! It’s kind of a dirty little secret in most southern states here in America. It is very, very common in old east coast families and many other parts of the states. Trust me. It is more common in smaller, almost isolated type of areas. Sounds crazy, but it happens right under our noses. I know of families that have been mingling for over a hundred years at least. From name sharing for centuries and marrying cousins at 15 or 16, to people on a whole block looking alike, to looking very inbred, it’s here.

          6. Oh yuck, Pippa and Harry. I’m inclined to believe that Pippa might have tried some “Kate” moves on Harry as they worked so well on William…

        1. Honestly, I don’t think those rumors are true about Pippa. They started with OK magazine which is the least reputable source. I saw articles laughing at the idea–and not saying it’s true. IMO, I think Harry wants someone true just like himself (a good, honest, not social climbing human being)–and not fake like anyone in the Mids family. I think he wants someone who will have the true dedication as he does to his causes. I read that he is wants a “serious” woman from reputable sources.

          I also think it was an article to make Harry look bad to bolster WK because Pippa is seen as not very desirable–no one wants her at all. All her boyfriends dump her. She waits for a ring from a rich guy, and it never happens. She has been described as girlfriend but not marriage material. HM will not allow it anyway. I don’t think she is very fond of Kate or the Mids.

        2. Yes apparently you can marry your first cousin in the UK. Though the gene pool is rather limited and you run the risk of birth defects in the children. Queen Victoria and Albert were cousins, I am not sure of the degree and HM and Phillip were cousins.
          Are William and Kate cousins?

          2. Victoria and Albert were first cousins: his father and her mother were siblings.

            As I recall, William and Kate are cousins in some very distant degree. Wikipedia says it’s fourteenth cousins.

          3. William and Kate are not related in any way.

            When royals become engaged, their line is published in the UK media. Going back as far as they need to, in order to find a link.

            Their is a joke that most English people are related to the royals distantly, but in Kate’s case, she’s one of the few who is not.

            Her line didn’t find any connection at all. On both sides.

            If there had been, it would have been trumpeted from the roof tops.

            She’s the first completely unrelated person to marry a royal. Even Elizabeth Woodville, infamously cited as being a common wife of no royal blood when she married Edward IV, had some royal blood connections via her mother who was of the royal house of Luxembourg.

            HM and Philip are 3rd cousins. They are both great grandchildren of Queen Victoria.

          5. Runner: Re: that DM article purporting to show links between William and Kate.

            That article was written in 2010 yet curiously lacking in all official documents during and after the engagement period when both their ancestral genealogies were published.

            Further, when you google Sir Thomas specifically, while it’s true he was married to Elizabeth Knollys, every report says that the suggestion that he is Kate’s ancestor is inconclusive.

            The nail in the coffin is the coat of arms. A coat of arms is forever. Even if one isn’t forever.

            Sir Thomas as a knight, and one highly regarded in the Elizabethan court would have had a coat of arms which any of his descendants would have referenced. Sophie’s family have a coat of arms dating back a few centuries too.

            Yet, the Middletons couldn’t call on the use of their ancestral coat of arms………that is highly unlikely in the way these things are arranged AND given how desperately the Middletons wanted a coat of arms.

            Even if the link was tenous, when Mike Middleton applied for a coat of arms the first time, he would have been told about th ancestral one which would have proved his link to Sir Thomas.

            Or if you look at it from Elizabeth Knollys’s side of the family, she was of royal blood, possibly Henry 8’s own grand-daughter, whose family had been consistently rewarded by Henry and by Elizabeth. She would have had several coats of arms to bequeath her descendants, and yet, nothing made it’s way to the middletons?

            All of that said, it’s been more than 4 years since the wedding, and the media keep trying to dig up blood relations that link the middletons to the royal family, and fail to show conclusive proof for their suggestions.

            If there were proof, the middletons would have shouted it from the roof tops.

          6. Herazeus, I wish you would reconsider your position. According to Patrick Cracroft-Brennan, William and Catherine are 11th cousins once removed through an illegitimate child of Edward IV and 14th cousins through an ancestor of Diana, Princess of Wales. Her ancestor was also a cousin of the great-great-great-grandmother of Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother. Many people are descended from aristocratic, royal or distinguished lineage.
            I am descended directly from William Brewster and Stephen Hopkins, both of the Mayflower. Over centuries, people’s lineage erode, they intermarry and soon enough, they are not entitled to their own coat of arms. I know it is a pity but it is a cross we as descendants of famous people must bear. 🙂

          7. Seth: as i said in a previous comment, most people are related to the royals.

            My comment isn’t a slur on anyone nor is it intended to be.

            On the subject of Kate Middleton, i’d really love to know who this illegitimate child of Edward IV from whom she is descended. My BFF’s husband wrote the book ‘The Plantagenets’ so we’ve been knee deep in that period from their beginning in France to the death of Richard III for the past ten years. Helping him with research in places and generally looking up any and all rumours and where those might lead. And illegitimacy had a different meaning in that period than it does now. it was only an issue where inheritance was concerned. Societal attitude to illegitimate children wasn’t the same as we view them in the modern age.

            Secondly, Diana……my particular speciality is the Churchills. Perhaps i missed out on this connection in the Spencer branch of the Churchills, but i doubt it.

            Which all leads back to Coats of arms and how they work. It’s been 8+ yrs since Kate became William’s GF. Since her 25th birthday there has been wild speculation that they might marry. And in all that time, there has been different speculation as to how she might be related to William, with no conclusive proof or a Coat of Arms that could connect her to William’s side. At every proposed connection, there is a wealth of coats of Arms to choose from, yet the Middletons couldn’t come up with a single one.

            And as i said in a previous comment, Sophie’s coat of arms came from centuries connection. Her family was not as wealthy as the Middletons, and posed the same conundrum when it came to a coat of arms for the family. one was found from a centuries old connection. that’s not to say that a coat of arms is proof of a blood link, but in Kate’s case, the variety of arms available to the proposed links are mostly blood ones.

            The college of arms is very good at their records. they would have made it a point to explain to the Middletons these connections especially if they were blood ones..

          8. Herazeus, I was being sarcastic. I’m quite proud that my ancestors include some of the first European-Americans. I think you should correct Wikipedia then, b/c according to the ancestry articles, they are related through Elizabeth Plantaganet, King Edward IV’s illegitimate daughter and Sir Thomas Fairfax, whose wife descended from King Edward III. Also according to the “Daily Telegraph,” the bible of the middle class, woman named Baroness Airedale was a cousin of Michael Middleton’s grandmother and was present at King George V’s coronation.

  9. You can tell how arrogant William is when he is out in public trying to be sincere. Its superficial. Harry never is. I just wished he had something to say about DoLittle.

    1. I know—but how interesting that it was allowed to be published in the Express, a pro-royal paper. I do think that everything that comes out has some PR purpose. The royals control the media very well.

  11. Wharfe is the one who came forward and criticized the plan for KM to move home with her parents for an extended time after the first baby arrived. Until he came forward, many people did not realize how much that was going to cost per day. As a former royal security officer, he knows first-hand how difficult it is to secure them when they are in off-site properties.

    Having that kind of cost info to hand, when up against the PR of “oh she just wants her mummy around” is important when discussing modern royalty, and how much these two and their constant antics cost the taxpayers.

    Whatever his motives are, I appreciate that he shares that kind of info. Who knows, maybe he is a long-time “fan” of Diana who is disappointed in William and that’s why he keeps spilling.

    2. Maybe, I am remembering incorrectly, but I thought I read some negative comments from Wharfe years ago concerning Diana.

      Kate doesn’t understand money because she never had to earn an honest pound on her own. Why couldn’t Carole go to W&K’s home post PG’s birth? Why did they have to make an arrangement that cost the taxpayers so much money?

      These two do not care what the public thinks of them. Until public opinion really plummets, I do not think we will see any change from W&K (fake change or real).

      1. But the opinion is already plummeting. There was another piece in the Daily Mail by Sarah Vine about how we must sympathize with Kate after the first piece with the photos. There was so many negative comments from women who have to work, clean the house, take care of the kids, cook, etc–that no one felt sorry for her. People aren’t buying what they are selling.

        1. The way I read the Sarah Vine piece was as a complete piss take, full of sarcasm… I couldn’t believe her comments were serious.

          2. It was totally sarcastic–though isn’t she supposed to be with the others because she saw the kiddos? It was meant to trigger so much anger in everyone who read it against Kate.

  12. Whatever his motivations, I find his comments fascinating and believable. Also, I can’t speak to his discretion or lack there of, but if your life is going to be handled and managed by other people, you cannot expect total and complete privacy. I think staff start to talk when there is juicy gossip or they feel they aren’t respected. I get the feeling William is a bear to deal with and unless someone is kissing his behind 24/7 you aren’t going to see his “nice side”. Honestly if I was on his staff and treated poorly, I’d talk also.

    Here is my rant: the “normal lives” business makes my head want to explode!! This normal man is the same guy who throws fits if his staff doesn’t curtesy to his wife? The same man who wanted to do his own gardening but seemingly the first staff he hired at his country estate was a gardener and a maid? His hubris is mind blowing. No way does he want to be normal. He wants the perks of royalty without any accountability.

    I’m starting to think his mantra is “royalty and the press killed my mom” and he loathes and disrespects both, except for the royal perks. I don’t mean to be disrespectful, but what killed his Mom was that she got in a car without a seat belt on with a drunk driver. I’m not saying she didn’t have it rough in the royal family, but in that moment that is what killed her.

      1. Exactly! Him and his wife apparently were loyal employees for the Queen but left the Cambridge household quickly. I know some employment situations don’t work out but when you add up the drip, drip that keeps coming out on William especially, it isn’t a pretty picture

  13. Bad, bad day for Part-Time Prince and Her Royal Hairness. Her slated in the DM, him slated in the Express. What will tomorrow bring?!

  14. William cancels out his ‘I want to be normal’ schtick when the first answer to a question about what defines him is ‘I am a Prince’. The arrogance and hubris in that one statement tells you everything you need to know about him.

    Ken Wharfe may talk, but if you listen carefully, he doesn’t really say anything that isn’t already in the public arena.

    Have you read any of Richard Kay’s articles on William and Kate in the past 4yrs? Over and over, loud and clear, Richard Kay says what a nightmare William is.

    Camilla Tominey has written several articles on William and Kate that say in no uncertain terms what a B William is. She cites examples of his bad behaviour and calls a spade a spade.

    Richard Palmer, when he isn’t sucking up, always points the finger at William.

    Ditto Niraj Tanna every chance he gets.

    Even the two syncophants, Victoria Arbiter and Darren McGrady have spilled in guarded terms how difficult William is.

    and that’s before you throw in reporters from the Murdoch press and others on the DM. The daily beast also frequently points out what a pain William is.

    Just about the only person pushing Prince Charming is Simon Perry over at People Magazine. And hello magazine, but they’ve never said a bad word about anyone which is why they are trusted with fluffy, golden glow coverage.

    1. Yes, I’ve read the Richard Kay articles. I went down the rabbit hole looking for Ken Wharfe articles because I remembered the Richard Kay articles but couldn’t remember who they were by. Then I realized Wharfe and Kay are not the same person. Kay has written some really scathing articles about William. You are right, loads of people have called out William and Kate. Which is why it sucks so much for them to be curtailed after that meet-and-greet.

      1. “rabbit hole”
        Love it!
        By any chance did you find Paul Burrell down that rabbit hole too? With James Hewitt?
        We have heard about James in the media lately but Paul Burrell seems quiet lately.

  15. William cancels out his ‘I want to be normal’ schtick when the first answer to a question about what defines him is ‘I am a Prince’. The arrogance and hubris in that one statement tells you everything you need to know about him.

    Ken Wharfe may talk, but if you listen carefully, he doesn’t really say anything that isn’t already in the public arena.

    Have you read any of Richard Kay’s articles on William and Kate in the past 4yrs? Over and over, loud and clear, Richard Kay says what a nightmare William is.

    Camilla Tominey has written several articles on William and Kate that say in no uncertain terms what a B William is. She cites examples of his bad behaviour and calls a spade a spade.

    Richard Palmer, when he isn’t sucking up, always points the finger at William.

    Ditto Niraj Tanna every chance he gets.

    Even the two syncophants, Victoria Arbiter and Darren McGrady have spilled in guarded terms how difficult William is.

    and that’s before you throw in reporters from the Murdoch press and others on the DM. The daily beast also frequently points out what a pain William is.

    Just about the only person pushing Prince Charming is Simon Perry over at People Magazine.

Comments are closed.

Related Posts

Belgian Royal Family Crown Princess Mary Crown Princess Victoria Fashion Jewelry Kate Middleton King and Queen of Bhutan King Charles III Luxembourg Royal Family Prince William Queen Letizia Royal Family of Jordan Royal Family of Norway Spanish Royal Family Swedish Royals

Who was best dressed at Buckingham Palace reception ahead of Coronation?

British Royals Camilla Duchess of Cornwall Fashion Jewelry Kate Middleton King Charles III Prince William Sophie Countess of Wessex Tiara Event

Kate in sparkles & Camilla finally wears something new to first State Banquet of Charles reign

Back To Top