Would They Have Married?


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Kate went to Chile a year after William, so I don't think her decision to go had anything to do with him.

She also never changed her major. William did change his though. He went from Art History to Geography, not the other way around. As for her changing schools, I have no idea if that's true. No one close to them has ever disclosed her reasons for picking St. Andrews.

I doubt that Kate modeled in the fashion show specifically for William. I know that's supposedly where William realized that he felt something for her, but they were already good friends at that time. So she didn't need to capture his attention.

Like every one of you, I know many married couples. And even though I know some of them extremely well and have known them both from the day they met, I don't presume to know why they married.

How could anyone make such a guess about people whom they know only from tv, newspapers, magazines and discussion boards? This seems pointless at best, and a little creepy at worst.

Exactly.
 
Last edited:
According to at least one of her biographers, Kate had already enrolled at and been accepted at another university before she changed her mind and decided to go to St. Andrews because William was going there. When he changed his major from Geography to Art History, she did likewise. Before that, she had chosen to go to Chile for gap year because that's where he was going. She modeled that see through getup to capture his attention. She informed her bosses at Jigsaw that her schedule must remain flexible to accommodate him.

I agree with the other posters. I doubt William would have gotten the time of day from Kate if he had not been Prince William. And it doesn't sound to me like he needed to chase her very much at all.

All unauthorized biographies with no reputable sources. The idea of her as some sort of mad prince-hunter- it's a made for tabloids thing.

One thing you learn very quickly about folks born into great privilege: They are VERY wary of people using them. I imagine William could spot an infatuated fan girl from a mile away and he would have bolted so fast he would have left a hole in the door.
 
I don't think Kate was a "mad Prince hunter" at all. I think she knew what and who she wanted and made sure that she was strategically placed at all times in order to maximize her chances of getting it. She is way too smart a woman to have been so overtly aggressive as to turn him off. She just made sure that she was in his line of vision and was as available as humanly possible.


And to be perfectly honest I might have done exactly the same thing in her position.
 
Last edited:
I'll jump in on this one. Its my understanding that for the first year they were at St. Andrew's, they were both dating someone else but were friends. I really don't think there was any ulterior motive on Kate's part whatsoever. They were two people that after forming a strong friendship, realized that it was more for the both of them.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Katie Nicholl is the author of "Kate: The Future Queen". She is not a tabloid journalist nor is she anti-Kate. She is the author of the most fawning Cambridge articles to be found anywhere and is in fact responsible for this month's Vanity Fair cover story of William/Kate/George.

For her book she interviewed Jasper Selwyn, a careers advisor at Kate's former school Marlborough College. She also interviewed Joan Gall, her house tutor. Both confirmed that Kate applied to and was accepted at Edinburgh University and was all set to attend. Then the news that Prince William was admitted to St. Andrew's was made public. Kate informed Edinburgh not only that she would not be attending...she had decided to take a gap year to Chile, which coincidentally William was also doing. She then reapplied to St. Andrew's as a freshman after a year...same as William.

So no. She did NOT go to Chile a year after William did...she followed him and was there at roughly the same period he was.

I respectfully disagree with anyone who says that her choice of college and the timing and place of her gap year was pure coincidence.
 
Last edited:
Katie Nicholl is definitely a tabloid journalist - she writes for the Daily Mail. When Kate and William were dating, she wrote a lot of anti-Kate articles. She didn't change her tune until the engagement was announced. Also, she's been known to be wrong with her insider information.

You're right. It wasn't a year later, it was 3 months later. William started his 10 week program in October and Kate started in January. Regardless, she would not have run into him since he was gone before she started her 10 weeks.

Before going to Chile, she spent 3 months in Italy studying at The British Institute.
 
Last edited:
So...why Chile? Why not Guatemala? Appalachia? And I am sure William was there longer than 10 weeks!

And...why cancel at Edinburgh after she had already applied and been accepted, in favor of St. Andrews?

If Katie Nicholl is anti-Kate, I sure want to see what her PRO Kate articles look like!
 
Last edited:
No, he was only there 10 weeks. That's the length of the the program.

Prince William has experienced unforgettable highs and character-building lows during 10 weeks of voluntary work in Patagonia, where he has earned admiration and respect for his hard work and easy-going nature.

I have no idea if she actually cancelled at Edinburgh, so I can't answer that. Nor can I answer why she chose Chile. She would not have run into him there, so there are obviously other reasons.

Like I said, KN's not anti-Kate now, but she was before the engagement. I would take what she says with a grain of salt.
 
Last edited:
The information about Edinburgh University is not speculation, it's a fact. She applied, was accepted, and then chose not to attend after the news became public that William was headed for St. Andrew's. Not coincidentally, the early rumors were that William was going to be attending Edinburgh University.:cool:

Her counselors and advisors confirmed the information about Edinburgh U. They have no motivation to lie, and if they had just made this up the officials at Edinburgh would have denied it.

They didn't.
 
Well I haven't seen them confirm that information, so it's not fact to me.

But let's say she did change university because of him, who cares? Why does it matter one iota?
 
Last edited:
No, he was only there 10 weeks. That's the length of the the program.



I have no idea if she actually cancelled at Edinburgh, so I can't answer that. Nor can I answer why she chose Chile. She would not have run into him there, so there are obviously other reasons.

Like I said, KN's not anti-Kate now, but she was before the engagement. I would take what she says with a grain of salt.

I have a book here by her and right now I'll be darned if I can remember the title of it. She talks about Will and Kate being on a vacation and making an "unofficial" pact that they would marry. It still boggles my mind on just how she would come to be in possession of that knowledge. :D

Regardless whether or not Kate's intention was to snag a prince, If it was the title, status and money she was after, I think she would have forced his hand into marriage a long time before they did get engaged. That's why what I see is two people that became friends, found that it was more and took their time making sure that marriage was the right step for them.
 
Katie Nicholl is most definitely a tabloid journalist- and one who has been mocked here for years for getting it wrong so often


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app
 
Well I haven't seen them confirm that information, so it's not fact to me.

But let's say she did change university because of him, who cares? Why does it matter one iota?

It matters because in this thread we are speculating about whether X would have married Y, if Y had not been Royal.

And my personal opinion based on certain published facts is that there is no way in Hades that Kate would have chosen to go to St. Andrew's if William had not gone there, and that the chances of her wanting to date him if he had not been PRINCE William are equally nil.

But you are right, in the final analysis it's ancient history, water under the bridge, etc.

Osipi, Kate didn't "force his hand" early because frankly she was in no position to. He DUMPED HER in 2007, and only after she took him back was she in any position to give him any ultimatums.
 
Last edited:
It's interesting that during the engagement interview, William only mentions them breaking up in university. Nothing about a 2007 breakup.

I have a book here by her and right now I'll be darned if I can remember the title of it. She talks about Will and Kate being on a vacation and making an "unofficial" pact that they would marry. It still boggles my mind on just how she would come to be in possession of that knowledge. :D

Regardless whether or not Kate's intention was to snag a prince, If it was the title, status and money she was after, I think she would have forced his hand into marriage a long time before they did get engaged. That's why what I see is two people that became friends, found that it was more and took their time making sure that marriage was the right step for them.

Probably the same way she came by the info that Otto the dog ate Kate's earrings. :lol:
 
Last edited:
moonmaiden, i didn't know the facts you were talking about, so it's all new to me, but i do remember how there were talks that prince william would go to edinburgh uni (the uni even built a whole new lot of student accommodation, all brand new, in case the prince were to come... i guess that means the rumours about him attending edinburgh were fairly stable)

It's interesting that during the engagement interview, William only mentions them breaking up in university. Nothing about a 2007 breakup.

the break in 2007 was very much publicized. they even talked about it during their engagement interview, i believe.
 
LOL! You had to have lived on Mars to have escaped the 2007 breakup-and even there I bet they reported the story! HELLO Magazine had a collective nervous breakdown, and practically behaved as if William had committed murder. They even had the nerve to suggest that the Prince of Wales should pay Kate to go live abroad and start a new life..NBC's Today Show ran it as a leading news story.....insane.:ohmy:

I'm sure that it was discussed here at TRF when it happened, and one can simply pull up the old Kate/William threads to read about it.

If there was also a breakup at St. Andrews I guess it means that there was more than one.

And yes...William was originally reported as being all set to go to Edinburgh. I distinctly remember reading it online after he left Eton. Kate applies to Edinburgh and gets accepted. Then it was announced that William was going to take a gap year and enroll at St. Andrew's after a year. Kate cancelled plans to go to Edinburgh and took a gap year, after which she applied to St. Andrew's.

Mere coincidence??:cool:
 
Last edited:
Would they have married them?

William has a long history about who he lets into his inner circle of trust. He would have spotted a title chaser a mile a way.

Both Pippa and James went to Edinburgh so it isn't surprising that Kate also thought of going there.

People magazine had a story in its issue for the royal wedding. It was a first hand account of an American student that lived at St Sallies with Will and Kate and was friends with both of them. It had pictures of her with both of them and basically she said that WK were really good friends and you could see the chemistry between them. Here's a link to online shorter bit about the American. The actual article in the printed magazine is longer with more details

http://www.people.com/people/mobile/article/0,,20485448,00.html


Some one earlier said that Kate didn't have any leverage to force Wills hand if she wanted to get married earlier- if she was the one taking care of the protection, she had plenty of leverage.

My personal thoughts is that you don't go through the harassment and bs that Kate went through and still is going thru if you don't truly love him. Plus there has to be feelings from William's side. He didn't have to comeback when they broke up in 2007.



Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
I've never said that she did not love him. And the fact that they became friends at St. Andrew's and had chemistry doesn't really change the fact that she deliberately chose to place herself where she knew he would be...that she decided she wanted him while at Marlborough and planned her life accordingly.

She also does not strike me as the type of girl who would have used pregnancy to trap him. But that doesn't mean I think she had the upper hand before the 2007 breakup...I definitely don't think so.

After that? You bet!

I have no idea why he dumped her. I have heard rumors that are not confirmed, and have no business in this thread. But you are right, he did come back. He made promises and he kept them. And that does count for quite a lot.

Any "harassment and bs" Kate is going through as a member of the BRF is more than balanced by the fawning, almost hysterical adulation she receives from press and public the world over. Not to mention the not inconsequential perks she receives. Lavish holidays in the tropics a few times a year along with multi-million dollar renovations to one's Palace apartment probably takes the sting out of much of the unpleasantness.

Here in the US she can practically do no wrong.
 
Last edited:
the break in 2007 was very much publicized. they even talked about it during their engagement interview, i believe.

No, he didn't mention the 2007 break up in the engagement interview.

TB: People are bound to ask, you leave university, you have been going out for a bit and you split up, famously, all over the papers, what was all that about, people are bound to want to know.

William: Well I think to be honest, I wouldn't believe everything you read in the paper but in that particular instance we did split up for a bit. But that was just, we both were very young, it was at university, we were sort of both finding ourselves as such and being different characters and stuff, it was very much trying to find our own way and we were growing up, and so it was just sort of a bit of space and a bit of things like that and it worked out for the better.

I know their 2007 break-up was highly publicized, but a few weeks ago, one the royal reporters said there was speculation that they faked the break-up. They supposedly did it so the press would back off. I don't know if that's true, but I thought it was interesting. Especially when looking at William's answer from the engagement interview.
 
Last edited:
1. Kate have married William had he not been royal?....NO
2. Letizia married felipe?..PERHAPS
3. Mary married fred?......NOT 100% SURE
4. Mette marit married Haakon?...YES. He would have been an improvement on anyone in her circle at that time, even if he hadn't been Royal
5. Daniel married Victoria?...NOT SURE...MAYBE
6. Maxima married WA?.....SEE ABOVE
7. Mathilde married philippe?...YES. As long as we was at least an aristocrat
8. Stephanie married guillaume?...SEE ABOVE. Steph's title is 100x more ancient than Gui's. A better question is would he have married HER if she hadn't been an aristocrat
9. Charlene married albert?...NOPE
10. Marie married Joachim?...NO IDEA. I never paid attention to their story
11. Masako married naruhito?....NO. She had a great career that she loved

12. Salma married mohammed?...don't know their story
13. Marie Chantal married pavlos?...if he was otherwise wealthy and prominent...YES. If not....NO
14. Iñaki married cristina?....NO WAY
15. Chris married Madeleine?...MAYBE
16. Sophia marrid carl phillip?....see #4. Same situation as MM

17. Ari behn married Martha?...NO IDEA..don't know their story
18. Maria Teresa married henri?...YES
19. Claire married felix of Luxembourg?...NOT SURE...PERHAPS
20. Tessy married Louis of Luxembourg?...since she already had his child, yes. Would she have become pregnant by him if he hadn't been Royal? Not so sure!
 
Last edited:
cepe said:
This used to be a forum where we learnt about royal history and protocol; history of royal regalia etc...
The Royal Forums website comprises some 175 forums, subforums and sub-subforums to which members have access. Within this organised structure there are over 16,000 thread topics containing a total of over 1.4 million posts.

The subforum in which this thread is located is titled "Royal Chit Chat". Therefore no-one should be surprised that it may not be particularly educational, enlightening, or factual. It contains everything from considered opinion, thoughtful insight and factual discussion to wishful thinking, wild speculation and ridiculous flights of fancy. Such "chit chat" may be enjoyed by some but not by others. So be it. Within the parameters laid down by TRF's owner the Forums is broad enough to encompass most shades of 'discussion' and the policy of the Admins and Mods is to avoid being overly proscriptive in relation to allowable subject matter. If this thread is not to everyone's taste there are another 16,000 to choose from.

This thread is rubbish, pure trash... It's becoming quite difficult to see the difference between The Royal Forums and Royal Dish.
On the contrary, I would argue that to even the most casual observer there is a vast and obvious difference between the tone, content, oversight and management of the two sites.
 
Would Countess Stephanie de Lannoy have married Prince Guillaume if he was not a Prince and a Hereditary Grand Duke? Would Prince Guillaume have married Stephanie if she had not been a Countess?
 
If they still had moved in the same circles and encountered each other, I don't see a reason why not. I don't have the impression that Stephanie was after the position of hereditary grandduchess and Guillaume didn't have to marry someone from the nobility but the (Belgian) nobility was very much part of his social circle.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom