Skip to main content

Frogmore Cottage: The empty house


No lights. No vehicles. No deliveries. Nobody going in or out. No visible security presence. And yet Frogmore Cottage is supposedly the home of Prince Harry, sixth in line to the British throne, along with his son Archie Harrison, seventh in line, and Harry's spouse the Duchess of Sussex.

It's all quite strange, because the media continues to run clearly planted stories about how much the Duke and Duchess of Sussex enjoy living at Frogmore Cottage. Frogmore has "much better energy" than their former digs at Kensington Palace, according to an article this week in People Magazine, which is reportedly paid a fee for a set number of pro-Meghan articles per month.

The locals don't see them

But people who live nearby say the house appears to be empty, and that they have never seen either Meghan or Harry in the surrounding grounds or in the small town of Windsor, where a tall red-headed prince or biracial American mom with a new baby would probably be noticed.

And the locals would know, because the house is extremely close to public roads and a public footpath. From some vantage points you can see in the windows.

The poor location from a security standpoint - along with the constant noise of planes roaring over the house towards Heathrow Airport - was one of the many reasons Frogmore Cottage was seen as a bit of an insult when the Queen presented it to Harry as a place for his family to live.

In addition, the house is small ("It is terribly little," the Queen says to Charles on a video recorded a couple of years back) and has traditionally been used to house staff and servants including Queen Victoria's Indian Muslim teacher Abdul Karim, known as The Munshi, another foreigner whose relationship with a member of the Royal Family was seen as questionable.

It also overlooks a family graveyard, where both Victoria and her husband Albert lie at rest, along with the notorious Duchess of Windsor Wallis Simpson. 

A very quick renovation

Supposedly the Sussexes moved into Frogmore Cottage in March, in advance of the birth of their first child. 

This was earlier than expected, because the Cottage needed extensive renovations to be transformed from staff apartments to a Royal residence, and those renovations could have only begun in the fall when the Queen chose the location for the Sussexes. 

Anyone who has done renovation work on an old building, with all the necessary tear-downs, plumbing adjustments, and electrical rewiring required, will know that a conversion of this magnitude generally takes more than five months. 

Historically listed buildings like Frogmore Cottage add the complication of getting everything done according to regulations that protect the building's original character. 

Meanwhile, a great deal of publicity was released about floating floors, vegan paint, and a yoga studio being installed for the pair at Frogmore Cottage, along with fabulous interior design by Soho House designer Vicky Charles.

But none of this has ever been pictured in the media. And the Sussexes have never been photographed at the house or around the house. 

The People article talks about "a steady stream of visitors" going to see the new baby, but locals say they have not seen anyone at all. 

Where are the Sussexes?

So where do the Sussexes live? And do they even live together?

Prince Harry has done a number of appearances recently, both in the UK and outside it (Italy, the Netherlands). The Royal Family seems determined to keep him within the family fold.  

Harry also continues to take meetings at Kensington Palace. Does he still live there?

Meghan has been entirely absent from public since her bizarre appearance in a white dress shortly after the birth announcement. She still apparently runs the Sussexes' Instagram account, @SussexRoyal, which reflects her unique writing style and spellings.

Officially, no nanny has been hired to take care of the newborn, and Meghan's mother was spotted back in Los Angeles shortly after the birth. 

Is Meghan entirely alone with a newborn? That seems like a lot to ask of a first-time mother with little childcare experience living in a foreign country. 

The Frogmore House Tours

This week from Wednesday to Friday, Frogmore House - the larger mansion located near Frogmore Cottage - will be open for its annual charity tours. 

Some of the visitors who come to see the house will no doubt be tempted to go over and look at Frogmore Cottage. 

What will they see?  A family home, perhaps with a baby in a carriage in the garden, getting a bit of fresh spring air?

Or an empty building?

---------
EDIT May 29: Visitors to Frogmore on the first charity open day saw a couple of shiny new vehicles outside of Frogmore Cottage, plus a couple of open windows, a not-particularly-muscular attempt to suggest that someone was inside.

They were most impressed by the deafening noise of the airplanes overhead every 2-3 minutes as they land at nearby Heathrow Airport.

One unkind observer even said that the cottage's small size and poorly-matched modern windows made it look like "a care home in Bognor", a run-down seaside resort in West Sussex.

Read more comments from Frogmore visitors.



Comments

Anonymous said…
I think they are staying in an KP apartment under a tight watch. Harry has been asked to step up and meghan is being watched. The DM is reporting mostly about Mua friend and Jessica Mulroney etc. Now slowly meghan's social climbing stories are being released. Meghan is quieter these days and it maybe because she is watched.
Now! said…
Agree that lots of Meg's social climbing stories are being released, particularly her ambitions in Britain - the footballers she followed, the X Factor winner she was corresponding with, the TV presenter she befriended, her hopes for being added to the cast of "Made in Chelsea."

Not sure if this is because the press have been given permission (or encouragement) by Lord Geidt, because the press is angry about her deceptions surrounding the birth announcement, or the fact the press senses that she his finished and they have nothing more to fear from disclosure. Possibly a combination of all three.
DramavilleKC said…
The gloves have definitely come off with the British press. Hence, all these articles hinting at her past.

Cringe and Handbag are utter idiots. They have treated the British press like crap and have shown favoritism to Kneepads, Gayle King etc. Now, we are getting the stuff they have probably been sitting on.
Now! said…
What I find odd is that no one in the press has called out the Frogmore Cottage deception. They know better than anyone that no one is there; reporters were staking out Windsor waiting for the birth announcement. I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to find construction or maintenance workers to interview either, people who could explain how far along the renovation actually is.
hunter said…
Nutttyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!!! Of course I've been awaiting a new post. In the meantime I've GONE DEEEEEEPPP (twitter, Tumblr for god's sake, I'm... all of it) and have fully unearthed just about all the stones so I feel fully on track.

THAT SAID - I seem to be the only one who's noticed the crack in the royalsussex's IG account. Based on her tiling scheme with her dumbass Royal-M logo (cringe), the latest one (yesterday) was not posted and breaks the former pattern of logo'd navy blocks, suggesting she does NOT have internet access.

The account is likely now being managed by palace staff.
This leads me to agree with the afore-mentioned crew of Megxits (I don't know what meg watchers are) who believe she is being holed up at Chatsworth Hall (?) in Derbyshire based on a poem from an anon Skippy had decoded (SEE WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO ME!??!).

People continues to release wet napkin praise stories based on very little since she seems to have no access to anything. They believe Lord Greidt has her, everyone says there's no baby.

They say there WAS a {girl} baby based on pink flowers at baby shower and various pink things hinted at over time (I myself have seen these blips) but now it's a boy "baby" and it's rumored the planned surrogate was probably herded off by the palace "men in grey," as planned by LG. This is a theory upon which she then purchased a plastic or other mystery baby from Amal & Priyanka's people.

Mmmm. We'll see but nobody has seen hide nor hair of her.

Please check out their IG account for proof (missing logo'd navy block) she's no longer managing it.
hunter said…
Also - for their one year anniversary - there were no NEW photos of them together or celebrating. Don't you think there would have been if she was actually with him?
hunter said…
I totally think the Palace has unleashed the press on this. As of two days ago the tide has turned on royal articles. They're juuuust getting started.
hunter said…
Nutty - there's a fair chance the palace has an injunction against any news related to Frogmore Cottage.

I read a thing somewhere about how those injunctions work and it's a solid explanation for why we don't hear shit (and foreign press doesn't know Frogmore like the UK would).
Unknown said…
Hi! New here but I just wanted to say I'm so glad to have found your blog! It's so well written and professional and, even though I didn't really follow the Harry/Meghan gossip til this completely BIZARRO baby thing, now I'm (overly) into it and check every single day to see if you've posted something new. Have learned SO much just from the comments alone!

Sooooooo...obviously Meghan is a complete sh*tshow of a public figure. It seriously takes a special kind of stupid to create a mess THIS big. Nothing she and Harry ever do seems to line up with what we (the public) are told by/about them!

It also makes me sad because it never had to be this way. She was always kinda sketchy (again, I never followed them super closely but I remember reading that she said they met on a "blind date" and that she "didn't know who he was" before that?!) but she definitely could have won people over if she'd just shown some consistent, genuine interest in her new role, country and/or the well-being of those she's supposed to care about! Sorry but that's not that hard of a concept to grasp or to expect from a new member of the royal family!

And also, as an American myself, how do these British royal guys manage to pick the absolute WORST of American women? She is NOOOOOOT representing us well at all and I, for one, *personally* resent it! :)

Anyway, thanks again for your awesome work on this blog and can't wait to see how this all turns out!
Now! said…
Thanks, Unknown, I'm glad you enjoy the blog!

No need to check more than once a week, however. This is only a side project I work on when I have the time.

You might enjoy the Harry Markle blog as well. https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/
Now! said…
That's a very good point about the anniversary photos, Hunter. Maybe Meghan is concerned about the extra weight she recently gained, and does not want to be photographed until she has lost it.

You're also correct that the most recent Instagram post did not have the navy blocks, although it did have an awfully large amount of text, which is another Meghan trademark.
wiezyczkowata said…
also she is not under the protection of pregnancy, the press only needs to wait till Christening and then it will start for real,
Curious said…
I read a couple of weeks ago on CNN (I’m in the US) that the UK press hired a helicopter to take photos of Frogmore including photos of a bedroom, etc., such that it compromised security for HazBean and they needed to move out of Frogmore permanently. I was surprised there was no mention on DM given the $$ spent in renovating it.
Now! said…
Hi Curious. That was actually a different house, in the Cotswolds near SoHo farmhouse.

Harry and Meg leased it around the time of their marriage for a term of a couple of years. Apparently they were eager to get out of the lease and suggestion that the house was "unsafe" for them was a good way to do this.

Truly rich people - the Clooneys for example - would have probably just let the lease run out and not renew. But Harry isn't as wealthy as he might appear.

He apparently did not want to pay unnecessary rent for the extra year. Thus the violation-of-privacy lawsuit.

I'm not quite sure how a helicopter can take images of your bedroom unless you have a skylight, which pre-existing real estate pictures of the house do not show.
Curious said…
Thank you for the clarification! Makes me wonder more re: no one at Frogmore. Thanks again for your work! I don’t believe she was really pregnant but I also don’t understand why RF would allow farce (I understand that if baby isn’t “of body” then not allowed titles and stuff but Hazbean always say they don’t care about that - so hold them to what they say).
Now! said…
Yes, the Christening is going to be interesting, particularly the selection of godparents.

Eugenie would have been an obvious choice, since she's well-liked in the royal family and it would have been a way to draw a line under the unhappiness caused by Meg announcing her pregnancy (very early) at or immediately after Eugenie's wedding.

But Meg's media people have been attacking Eugenie lately - apparently there was an article in Radar Online the other day about how jealous Eugenie is of Meg's beauty and style.

So it looks like Eugenie's off the godparent list. Harry has been re-connecting with his old friend Tom Inskip - what about him?

Jessica Mulroney would certainly be ready to serve as a godmother, although I have been told she was born Jewish (maiden name Brownstein) and godparents must be baptized Christians. Perhaps she has converted.

Lindsay Roth, another Meghan friend, went to university with Meghan and was one of the co-stars in Meg's topless video. She also attended Meg's wedding. But she is also Jewish and has not converted - Meg was maid of honor at Lindsay's Jewish wedding in 2016, according to the Jewish publication the Forward. So Lindsay's off the godparent list too.

Serena Williams is a Jehovah's Witness, and they do not believe in the baptism of babies. Baptism is for adults who have studied the Bible.

The religious status of Daniel Martin, Meghan's weepy makeup artist, is unclear.

Maddie said…
Frogmore cottage is very ugly and from what few pictures I have seen, it does not have a fancy front door or look like a nice country house. I could be wrong.
Conservaterian said…
I am so excited to have stumbled upon this blog from your post on Crazy Days and Nights!! I have so many questions about that Viper. How was she able to turn a guy's guy into a simpering soy so quickly? I realize that Hapless Harry has severe Mommy issues, but Spenderella must have really studied hard on what buttons to push to make her so irresistible to him. From the latest articles on the Daily Mail, it is quite apparent that she had an elaborate plan worthy of the Pentagon, to snare the Prince. She is quite diabolical and should be feared.
Unknown said…
I'm sure Marcus Anderson was in the know and coached here all the way.
Aus Unknown said…
LOL at the Queen exclaiming how 'little' FC is! To her, most mansions would be small! It doesn't look especially tiny to me ... but back to the main issue: great summary, there is no evidence that they have ever lived there, save a statement from BP. So, it's just bizarre to say the least. I always thought it was too much of a security concern for them to be living there.
Aus Unknown said…

The British press, generally (save the fawning members) are very angry at their treatment by the BRF generally. It has been brewing for years. I believe that Meg might be the pawn, but she's not the reason they are putting the blowtorch to her undignified past. I didn't even realise about the Jewish bar to being a Godparent - thanks! I ought to know these things ...
Aus Unknown said…
An injunction may have been ordered [and ought to have been made public] but any final hearing would be a matter of public record. Also, FC is owned by the public, surrounded by public grounds, so it would be highly unlikely that any injunction would have been ordered on such a basis. After all, the public has been forced to pay for the renovations ... no, I think it's a step too far. The Queen can and does control the press on her own private property, however,
gfbcpa said…
Unknown - In the Roman Catholic faith, to be a Godparent you must have received the Sacraments of Baptism, First Communion and Confirmation. And you can't be divorced, unless you received an annulment from the church. I don't know about the Anglican Church in England, which is similar to what Episcopalian Church is here.
Aus Unknown said…
Thanks gfbcpa! I'm RC, so I knew loosely about the requirements of my faith (even if I'm a "cafeteria Catholic" - to quote the late Pope John Paul II). The RC has relaxed interpretation of some of the Code of Canon Law with respect to divorce (at least in my home country). As far as I can tell, divorce is not a bar to anyone being godparent, though at least one must be Catholic. I admit, I'm no expert, but such conditions may vary from country to country. I just can't find anything in my country to bar anyone from being a godparent if divorced. The Church allows parents to be divorced, so it's a bit silly to suggest a godparent is barred if divorced, IMO.

But the Catholic Church has always been viewed as "higher Church" than Anglican/Church of England ... it's not meant as an offence, it's just a distinction borne from the Church's stricter doctrine.
Jdubya said…
Nutty - have you read this article and looked at the posts from her old blog?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5598927/The-hunky-chef-Meghan-Markle-nearly-married.html
Jdubya said…
When Meghan ran her lifestyle blog, it gave her the opportunity to interview a wide variety of prominent people. Today, she might prefer to forget her rather breathless reflections on these encounters. However, they tell us as much about her as her subjects, as the following extracts show...

7 JULY, 2014

AFTER MEETING PRINCESS ALIA AL SENUSSI (Member of the exiled Libyan royal family)

'Little girls dream of being princesses. I, for one, was all about She-Ra, Princess of Power. And grown women seem to retain this childhood fantasy... Just look at the pomp and circumstance surrounding the royal wedding and endless conversation about Princess Kate. So when my dear friend... introduced me to Princess Alia Al Senussi, I had a bit of a 'pinch-me-I'm-emailing-with-a- princess' moment.'
Aus Unknown said…
LOL. Anyone with a brain knew what she was about ... that excludes Harry, of course.
Hi Nutty -

Love your blog! I read a couple others, but appreciate your balanced view. You bring me back from the rabbit hole I fall into sometimes.

I'm curious on your thoughts on the Cotswolds property they rented. The photos of the property make it seem like a security nightmare. And you can pretty much see in through the huge windows. Do you think the royal protection team would've allowed them to rent it?

I've wondered if mm rented it under PH's name, without his knowledge, because it is a fashionable location near celebrities she wants to be around and linked to? He never lived there (in my theory). And after mm had Splash media take pics (she's used Splash many times for pap walks), it gave PH the perfect opportunity to sue and get out of the lease he never wanted?
It also might make Splash think twice before doing business with mm again?
Now! said…
I'm glad you enjoy the blog!

There were suggestions that the Cotswold's property was "merched" - ie that the Sussexes lived there in an attempt to give it some cachet for future buyers.

It is located suspiciously close to Meghan's associates at SoHo Farmhouse.

I'm not sure about the security aspects; it may only be a problem once it has been publicly disclosed that they live there.

Bad guys need set locations or routines to make a plan. Kate takes the Cambridge kids to out in public to various shops, parks, and swimming pools, but no one knows they will be there in advance.

Frogmore Cottage would appear to be the real security nightmare, since it is so close to public footpaths and roads. Even if they did live there, I assume they would go elsewhere for the public open days at Frogmore House.

All they need is someone like that woman heckler in New York - "Meghan Markle, the Charlatan Duchess who conned the Royal Family" - screaming in the Sussexes' front window.
Jdubya said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
AM said…
I think you misunderstand high church vs low church. Any denomination/faith can have one or the other. I was raised Episcopalian. My dad explained high church as "smells, bells and yells." Smells=incense, bells are bells (church bells specifically), and yells are the chants and responses common in services, but they're sort of sung, and it is more like a yell. It's a more dramatic presentation of the service. Low church services are straightforward. Maybe this is different in England?
Aus Unknown said…
I'm Australian and don't think I've misunderstood, but perhaps I have. However, the incense etc is rarely used in RC churches so I don't think that was the interpretation. In any event, there is no doubt that the RC Church has a far more strict doctrine that Anglican.
Unknown said…
You know I lived for seven years at a nearby village (Wentworth Village) ad I can seriously not remember the plane noise. Even visiting Windsor, which we relatively frequently did, I can't recall it. I mean, at least to he point that it would be that bad that is all everyone remembers. If that be the case, what should the people around Heathrow say? And he BRF spend most their weekends at Windsor, especially in the summer. There are also quite a few cottages in the caste grounds occupied my minor royals.

I worked one day a week at an office in Hounslow for a while and there the planes are quite noisy, but we managed to zone in out and work quite OK. Also all air trafick is stopped at night, bearing in mind the family homes near (around) Heathrow. All I recall hearing a lot were the helicopters at nigh, especially in the summer coming from London.
Unknown said…
I'm sorry, I tend to not always press my keys hard enough, hence the many words sans the first letter.

Popular posts from this blog

Is This the REAL THING THIS TIME? or is this just stringing people along?

Recently there was (yet another) post somewhere out in the world about how they will soon divorce.  And my first thought was: Haven't I heard this before?  which moved quickly to: how many times have I heard this (through the years)? There were a number of questions raised which ... I don't know.  I'm not a lawyer.  One of the points which has been raised is that KC would somehow be shelling out beaucoup money to get her to go "away".  That he has all this money stashed away and can pull it out at a moment's notice.  But does he? He inherited a lot of "stuff" from his mother but ... isn't it a lot of tangible stuff like properties? and with that staff to maintain it and insurance.  Inside said properties is art, antique furniture and other "old stuff" which may be valuable" but ... that kind of thing is subject to the whims and bank accounts of the rarified people who may be interested in it (which is not most of us in terms of bei

A Quiet Interlude

 Not much appears to be going on. Living Legends came and went without fanfare ... what's the next event?   Super Bowl - Sunday February 11th?  Oscar's - March 10th?   In the mean time, some things are still rolling along in various starts and stops like Samantha's law suit. Or tax season is about to begin in the US.  The IRS just never goes away.  Nor do bills (utility, cable, mortgage, food, cars, security, landscape people, cleaning people, koi person and so on).  There's always another one.  Elsewhere others just continue to glide forward without a real hint of being disrupted by some news out of California.   That would be the new King and Queen or the Prince/Princess of Wales.   Yes there are health risks which seemed to come out of nowhere.  But.  The difference is that these people are calmly living their lives with minimal drama.  

Christmas is Coming

 The recent post which does mention that the information is speculative and the response got me thinking. It was the one about having them be present at Christmas but must produce the kids. Interesting thought, isn't it? Would they show?  What would we see?  Would there now be photos from the rota?   We often hear of just some rando meeting of rando strangers.  It's odd, isn't it that random strangers just happen to recognize her/them and they have a whole conversation.  Most recently it was from some stranger who raved in some video (link not supplied in the article) that they met and talked and listened to HW talk about her daughter.  There was the requisite comment about HW of how she is/was so kind).  If people are kind, does the world need strangers to tell us (are we that kind of stupid?) or can we come to that conclusion by seeing their kindness in action?  Service. They seem to always be talking about their kids, parenthood and yet, they never seem to have the kids