Kate Middleton, the Princess of Wales, bravely took her new hair—the most polarizing royal story of the week—for a spin on Saturday evening, tying it back to support the England team in the Women’s Rugby World Cup.
It was a more successful outing for her new “bronde” locks than their public debut at an event in London this week, when the new look was dutifully praised by the mainstream British media but monstered online, with critics saying she looked like she was wearing a wig or hair extensions (both denied by her office).
One stylist and make-up artist, speaking anonymously as they have regularly worked for various royals, told the Daily Beast, “On Kate, it just looks a bit tacky. I hate to say it, but she looks more like an influencer than a royal.”
Her appearance earlier this week was Kate’s first full outing without the guiding hand of Natasha “Tash” Archer, her trusted aide and stylist of nearly two decades. Archer, who began working with Kate in the early 2010s, formally left her employ in July 2025 to launch her own consultancy, though she remained loosely involved for a short transition period.
Archer was not a hairdresser, but she curated Kate’s whole look: the balance of colors, the harmony between gown, jewels, and hair. She was essentially the architect of what became known as the “Kate effect.”
To lose that steady hand and immediately debut a look that has divided opinion so sharply underscores how much her absence is felt.
I asked my friend how much they thought the absence of Archer might have been responsible for the debacle earlier this week.
They said: “Archer put everything together for Kate. She was there on every trip, she was there when she had to face the cameras after the birth of her kids for god’s sake. She was her rock, so it’s a huge loss. I’m told she was someone who knew how to say, ‘maybe not’ to Kate which is so important. Personally I think Kate was mad to let her go and she was mad to leave. Kate should get her back. The gossip is that Archer was frustrated by Kate not doing many events, but, you know, that is going to change one of these days.”
Saturday’s appearance was more to the source’s liking: “Tying the hair back was a smart move because it has reined in the more overt caramel tones,” they said. “It’s also squashed the speculation she was wearing a wig. She is not wearing a wig, that’s very clear, but it definitely looks like she is wearing extremely expensive hair extensions.”
Another source in the fashion world told the Daily Beast: “Her hair looks better tied back because it’s very elegant to have your hair half up and half down. Because the hair extensions are so voluminous she looked odd with all of it down. No one’s hair looks like that at her age. She looked like a mermaid. Now she has tied it back, she has lovely thick hair, but it’s not overwhelming her head.”
The source added: “I have heard that she has actually had hair extensions for a long time, so I think what happened is she just went a bit far. That happens.
“I think the hair extensions she has now are out of proportion. Had she not gone quite as far with them, no one would have suspected. But it looks amazing pulled back because she is a beautiful girl so I think everyone is going to be very, very happy now.”
Saturday’s look was certainly much more elegant than Thursday’s, when Kate looked like a mouse peeking out of a haystack.
Although the mainstream U.K. media gave her look the breathless treatment, rushing to anoint it as the “start of a new trend,” using language that positioned her as a style leader, the internet disagreed, ultimately prompting Princess Diana’s former stylist Sam McKnight to come to her defense.
McKnight—the hairstylist who gave Princess Diana her iconic late-1990s look, that soft, layered, lightly rebellious cut that symbolized both her vulnerability and her autonomy—denounced the online pile-on against Kate, writing on Instagram that “a woman’s hair is very personal to her. It’s armor, defence, confidence and so much more.”
In words that cut through the noise, he reminded critics of the reality of Kate’s illness: “Cancer affects individuals differently, but is life changing for everyone. So FFS LEAVE HER ALONE. SHAME ON YOU.”
Stylist Jo Hayes of EtiquetteExpert.Org told the Daily Beast: “Her brunette locks have long set her apart as a sophisticated, elegant, royal — one who generally eschews ‘style trends,’ opting instead for a more classic, refined look. Personally, I think brunette suits her complexion far better than blonde. She is absolutely smashing as an elegant brunette. There’s some argument that the color is being used to cover greys— blonde is generally easier than deep brown for such matters. But I think the future queen has enough hair helpers to keep on top of gray coverage.”
The simple fact is that after years in which her glossy, chestnut blow-dry was seen not just her aesthetic crowning glory but also an image of continuity at a time of much royal change, it was naive to expect Kate to appear in public with a dramatically different look and not expect it to be microscopically scrutinized.
Ultimately, the problem is that the hair-down look we saw on Thursday just didn’t read as royal. Kate’s old look was aristocratic, rolling, and unmistakably hers. The “bronde” Kate with bouncy, buttery curls seemed like someone you are more likely to encounter on Instagram Reels than a Sandringham drawing room.
The Princess of Wales has been through a serious illness, and it goes without saying that she has the right to experiment with her appearance as she wishes.
But in the House of Windsor, appearance is substance. Hair, clothes, the smallest details are part of a language the family has long used to project stability, continuity, and authority. The monarchy has long invested visual cues with near-mystical import, so it can hardly complain when people decide these visual cues matter.
Want more royal gossip, scoops and scandal? Head over toThe Royalist on Substack
The post Kate Middleton Puts an End to Her Bad Hair Week appeared first on The Daily Beast.
