Prince “Bobby Davro” on Facebook
While his girlfriend Kate Middleton looks increasingly down in the dumps these days, Prince William keeps up his profile on social network site Facebook.com, albeit in a private capacity.
Kate Middleton braving rainy London
We are hearing that Prince William has put up a Facebook entry under the name of comic Bobby Davro. I wonder what the real Bobby Davro thinks of that — or if he even knows?
He has joined Harry’s girl, Chelsy Davy, who appears under “Chels D”. She also features on Wills’ list of friends, along with the Marquess of Reading’s 24-year-old daughter, Lady Natasha Rufus Isaacs, and ex-girlfriend Olivia Hunt.
Interestingly, Charles Morshead, who was recently seen escorting Kate Middleton to a nightclub, also materializes as a friend.
Kate looks as if she could with more than just a Facebook entry to cheer her up.
I think Kate is looks down because she has now seen the other side of the media with her being criticized. Like many before her and that includes Diana the media will build you up one minute and knock you down the next.
By Trudie on August 16th, 2007 at 3:57 pm
Trudie, it is risiculous that they have decided to start gunning for her.
What has she done that’s so bad?
Nothing.
By kit on August 16th, 2007 at 5:39 pm
She looks dreadful! What is going on in her head a wonder? She looks like she is carrying the weight of the world on her shoulders.
What is going on?
By SuffolkSim on August 16th, 2007 at 5:54 pm
I don’t blame her for looking glum, especially with some creepy photographer shoving a camera in her face. That combined with the cold, wet London weather is enough to get a girl down. Her only comfort is that it is far more chilly and damp in Scotland, at Balmoral, where it was generally supposed that she would be a guest during this portion of August. Right now I am going into my inner sanctum (read: kitchen) and try to meditate away my hosptility for the media. Personally, I don’t think it can be done. I shall snarl in the general direction of the TV and newspaper and then drown my angst in several cups of hot tea. Known to be very therapeutic…I hope.
By Gigi on August 16th, 2007 at 6:15 pm
*Sigh* My typos will be the end of us all! I meant to type “hostility.” (SNARL)
By Gigi on August 16th, 2007 at 6:30 pm
This photo would have been better:
LINK
At least no one could say she looks something or something else, just comments on the trash bag!
Poor Kate, really.
By Lilyfromfrance on August 16th, 2007 at 6:50 pm
Makes you wonder if C&C have finally gotten their way and it’s now totally over for William and Kate.
By Trudie on August 16th, 2007 at 7:34 pm
I swear those two (C&C) are the raspberry seed in my wisdom tooth! They will posion the pie for anyone! GRRRRRR!
By Gigi on August 16th, 2007 at 7:44 pm
As long as they dont poison the chocolate lawyer…
By Lilyfromfrance on August 16th, 2007 at 8:00 pm
LOL Now you know, sweet Lily, that I shall guard the chocolate layer cake with my life and keep it safe for all our posting friends who are partakers of Royal Anecdotes Tea.
If C&C even appear to be considering an attack on the chocolate layer cake, I shall spear them with a sterling silver dessert fork, I shall swear! 
(Yes, we are touchingly territorial about our Royal Anecdotes Tea chocolate layer cake.)
By Gigi on August 16th, 2007 at 8:25 pm
The vacation that she will take at Balmoral will do her some good. I attend to move to London sometime in the future but I’m told that it rains a lot there. I guess if the royals like London despite the rain, then so will I.
By Claudius on August 16th, 2007 at 11:14 pm
I agree with Trudie- the bad press is taking a toll on her.
But the good thing about press is it is fickle- so they will write nice things about her again- human nature is ever changing.
If she takes some time out of the limelight, the press cycle will begin again and she will be on top.
Also, I doubt Camilla is so dafy as to tell Prince William who he can see. She invited KM to her birthday party, she can’t dislike her that much.
By Summer on August 17th, 2007 at 3:22 am
Never poison a chocolate lawyer, Lily, just eat them for breakfast.
Claudius, London is just rainy this year, last year was a drought. It’s pick ‘n’ mix.
As for Kate, there’s an aristocratic tradition never to be in London during August.
By John on August 17th, 2007 at 7:47 am
Thank you, Gigi, for keeping the chocolate lawyer safe
“She invited KM to her birthday party, she can’t dislike her that much” Summer.
The weird thing is that no one knows if it’s true. We just have read in newspapers that some guests said she was there, but there is no pics that could prove it. The newspapers wrote that Zara wont be there, and…. she was there. There were some photos of people arriving at the party in their car, but any photo of Kate. And the thing that puzzles me is that her parents said she wasnt going. They keep their mouth closed, usually. It looks as if they were angry that she wasnt invited. Kate likes to be photographed when she goes to a “royal” event. So? Maybe there were 3 or 4 people who were advised to said she was there, in order to not make people having questions?
By Lilyfromfrance on August 17th, 2007 at 8:39 am
I have heard that Camilla gets on well with Kate — remember Kate smuggled herself into Clarence House the night before the Concert and stayed overnight. CH is Camilla’s London home.
But I hope this is resolved now. There seems no point keeping her dangling in the wings. As Prince Philip said, “Marry the girl, or let her go”.
Very sensible advice.
By John on August 17th, 2007 at 8:45 am
Most importantly, CH is Wills’ home aswell. I doubt that Kate went for visiting Camilla that night
If Wills really wants to marry her, what the hell he is waiting for? Philip is said to have told this to Wills last February. 6 months ago now! At least she could have a kind of “official status”? She is described as the on/off girlfriend. Poor Kate. And while Wills is thinking and thinking they let this poor Kate going nowhere? He should be with her now and he lets her all alone instead. If it still planned that they will spend the holidays somewhere, then it must be now. I cant see him going on holidays just few days before the MS. If we see some pics of Kate in London the next week, then there is no holiday for them.
Why did he not tried to invite her at the Memorial Service? It’s HIS mother, if he wants to have his future wife next to him on this day, then it’s his choice, not CH or the Palace’s choices. I would be very upset if I had a boyfriend for 5 years who keeps me away from this kind of events, prince or not. The attention was not so focused on these 2 at the concert.
By Lilyfromfrance on August 17th, 2007 at 9:04 am
The Memorial Service is in a smallish chapel and is for people who knew Diana personally. If Kate and Chelsy went, it would be a signal of semi-official status. It would also anger lots of people who knew Diana but can’t get a seat. I don’t regard their absence as significant.
By John on August 17th, 2007 at 9:11 am
I was not talking about Chelsy, John.
Just Kate. I would have been shocked if Chelsy was invited.
Kate was given this “semi official status” in the past, when she was given police protection and protection by CH, when she was invited at the Sandhurst parade and when she was invited at Christmas. If all the people who knew Diana had to be invited then the boys should have rent Wembley again. Who has the right to be angry if the future king of England and also the son of this woman wants to have his future fiancee next to him? She is in his life since 5 years, not since 3 months
John, I think that if you havent “follow” me when I was talking of a change of the mood, you would have posted an article saying that we would know about a potential engagement if Kate will be there or not. Afterall, 4 days ago you said that RA’s position was that a wedding is likely when Wills finishes his army in 2009, so let’s all put this talk about Kate’s future away and let’s talk about something else, and then we will see in September
Let’s eat a chocolate lawyer first.
By Lilyfromfrance on August 17th, 2007 at 9:41 am
Ha ha, I think I’d prefer a chocolate Kate.
That’s true, I did think they’d put it all on the back burner until 2009. But things have subtley changed and Kate just looks locked out.
I believe that William wants the stability and normality Kate brings to his life, but doesn’t want marriage, just “fun”. Maybe he doesn’t realize that what he now has with Kate is the reality of marriage.
By John on August 17th, 2007 at 9:57 am
Kit: therein lie the problem Kate has done nothing so the media gunning for Kate with negativity is how they sell papers. Kate now sells.
By Trudie on August 17th, 2007 at 11:04 am
They did help to provide Winston Churchill who was a sort of secular “King”, I suppose.
The Spencers are related to the Stuarts, so are linked to that dismal dynasty. They made their fortune in sheep during the Elizabethan period and were granted their grand titles. Before that they could well have been rustlers.
By John on August 17th, 2007 at 2:29 pm
Well no one really knows if Kate will be at the service. There’s no official list of the guest that will be attending. Somehow I have a feeling that she will be there but of course somewhere near by not next to him. William is waiting for the right time to pop the question, really there is no rush. Peter Phillips just popped the question to his girlfriend, can there be two royal weddings in the making at the same time? I just recieved the People Magazine edition on The Royals and they know that Kate is in this for good. There will be an engagement announced sometime soon, just be calm about it.
By Claudius on August 17th, 2007 at 2:38 pm
Does anyone have any idea where William is or at least where he should be right now?
By SuffolkSim on August 17th, 2007 at 5:44 pm
He’s based at Bovington Army Camp in Dorset, so I presume he’s engaged on training exercises.
He’s due at Balmoral too, I believe, so may spend the rest of August there. Speculation only, I’m afraid, Sim.
By John on August 17th, 2007 at 5:49 pm
Well John, according to this paper:
Prince William and Kate Middleton are currently holidaying on an island in the Indian Ocean. Supposedly it’s a make or break holiday for them. I really hope they enjoy themselves.
By mapleleaf on August 17th, 2007 at 10:34 pm
Yeah I just heard that they are on holiday. I’m glad for them.
By Claudius on August 17th, 2007 at 11:15 pm
I wonder why the holiday plans changed from a destination at Teapot Cottage at Balmoral to an island in the Indian Ocean. Perhaps to escape the rest of the Royal Family and also the peering eyes of the media. Let us all hope that things go well for them.
By Gigi on August 18th, 2007 at 12:39 am
John why do you hate Princess Diana so much? your answer regarding Winston Churchill also took a direct swipe at the Spencer family. At least Diana was descended from royalty unlike Camilla who is descended from another royal mistress.
By Trudie on August 18th, 2007 at 1:38 am
“The Spencers are related to the Stuarts, so are linked to that dismal dynasty. They made their fortune in sheep during the Elizabethan period and were granted their grand titles. Before that they could well have been rustlers.”
John, the Spencers, whether you like or hate them, are the traditional royal family of England. They were on the throne while the Windsors were still in Hanover.
According to one theory, Churchill was secretly the nephew of george VI, hence his favor with the royal court.
By kit on August 18th, 2007 at 9:14 am
Trudie, it wasn’t a swipe. It was the truth. The Spencer’s were wealthy sheep farmers, some say rustlers, before they received their titles and built Althorp.
Some aristocratic families regard themselves as superior to the Royal Family, calling the Queen and Prince Philip “Brenda and Brian” because they are “so middleclass”.
When the Queen gave Diana her jewels before the wedding, Diana was said to have run along the corridors of Buckingham Palace shouting repeatedly, “I’ve got Brenda’s rocks”.
By John on August 18th, 2007 at 9:46 am
How can anyone not love Di?
By kit on August 18th, 2007 at 10:06 am
Kit, there has never been a House of Spencer on the English Throne. The best they have are bloodline links. And I don’t “hate” them.
As for Churchill being a nephew of George VI, who was considerably younger than he was, Churchill didn’t seem to know that. Most of his life he was obsessed with the thought he would die before he was 40, like his father, Randolph Churchill.
By John on August 18th, 2007 at 12:19 pm
Cattle rustlers and coal miners? I have a more prestigious lineage than that!! Perhaps William would like to meet my niece… she’s even prettier than Kate…
LOL.
(”Brenda and Brian” I LOVE that!)
By Dodi on August 18th, 2007 at 1:01 pm
“Most of his life he was obsessed with the thought he would die before he was 40, like his father, Randolph Churchill.”
But I mean, if it were a secret, he wouldn’t come out and say it.
Clearly the theory necessitates that someone else was his father, and that he was secretly the half-brother of george V.
By kit on August 18th, 2007 at 3:38 pm
So if Churchill didn’t know, how come you know?
By John on August 18th, 2007 at 3:40 pm
*If* it’s true, there’s no reason why Churchill would necessarily not know.
By kit on August 18th, 2007 at 3:45 pm
In order for Sir Winston Churchill to have been the nephew of King George VI (father of Queen Elizabeth II), Winston’s Mother, Jennie Jerome Churchill would have to have had a liason with Prince Eddie, the oldest son of King Edward VII, or with Prince George, who became King George V. That is so unlikely as to be amusing. It is far more likely that Jennie became pregnant by King Edward VII, whose favorite she was known to be at various times during her romantic life. In that case, Winston would not be a nephew of King George VI but a cousin, since King Edward VII was the grandfather of King George VI. As a lifelong student of the life of Churchill, I am aware that the rumors of the questionable lineage abound, but I believe that Winston was the son of Randolph and Jennie. The physical resemblance between Winston and Randolph is too strong. Regarding Winston’s younger brother, Jack, his name and facial features are in strong support of the rumor that he was fathered by John Strange, another of Jennie’s lovers.
By Gigi on August 18th, 2007 at 7:50 pm
Oh good grief, just ignore that last post of mine. I need a nap!
If my present befuddlement continues, I shall resort to a tall flagon of Long Island Iced Tea and then retire to my boudoir for the duration. Failing that, I shall just faint dead away.
By Gigi on August 18th, 2007 at 8:39 pm
One further point, before I fade into the sunset: Winston thought he would died at 40, like his father Lord Randolph, because for some years he did not know the true cause of his Father’s death, which was venereal disease. When he was, at length, told the truth about Lord Randolph’s demise, he knew that such an illness would not cause his own death. Sir Winston was devoted to his wife, Clementine, and she to him.
By Gigi on August 18th, 2007 at 8:42 pm
Well John what can you expect from a 19 year old girl being given such priceless jewelry!!! I believe those who call the Spencers rustlers before they received their titles are aristocrats that are jealous their lineage does not go as far back as the Spencers. And ofcourse many in the aristocracy consider themselves superior to the Windsors as stated the Spencers were descended from the Stuart line while the Windsors were imports from Hanover. And correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t the Duke of Marlborough a Spencer-Churchill who have long enjoyed links to the throne via Queen Anne?. The Spencer family if I’m right is just a lesser branch of this illustrious family.
By Trudie on August 19th, 2007 at 2:26 am
Correct, Trudie! Well said! I take umbrage at anyone denigrating the kinsmen and lineage of Sir Winston Churchill.
By Gigi on August 19th, 2007 at 4:23 am
Gigi, quite right. To be a nephew of George VI, Churchill would have to have been sired by one of George’s brothers. Unlikely since (quick mental calculation) he was 25 years older than Bertie and the chronology doesn’t fit at all. You’re right too, he had a definite likeness to Randolph (pere).
As for the connections of the Marlboroughs to Queen Ann, it arose out of the very close friendship between John Churchill’s wife and the Queen, not a bloodline. John Churchill won a series of spectacular victories across Europe, including Blenheim, and was rewarded with the Dukedom of Marlborough and Blenheim Palace. The friendship eventually broke down though, leaving Marlborough in a financial mess. Winston was the youngest son of a Duke of Marlborough. At some point a marriage alliance was made with the Spencers, hence Winston Spencer Churchill.
The Hanover Georges were direct descendants of the Tudors, so were not foreign imports at all. They at least believed in Parliamentary Government, unlike the Stuarts who were autocrats. Britain’s high status in the world thereafter was built on the transference of power to the business classes.
By John on August 19th, 2007 at 9:05 am
Gigi, the theory was indeed that Churchill was the son of edward VII. I didn’t know his mother was a favourite of Edward 7th.
By kit on August 19th, 2007 at 6:44 pm
Sorry… the theory is that George VI was the secret nephew of *Churchill*, not the other way round.
By kit on August 19th, 2007 at 7:40 pm
Thank you, John.
Regarding the Stuarts and Tudors: when we consider (as we should, and, indeed, must) that the Tudor Dynasty began with Owen Tudor, it is clear that the Tudors have no reason to presume themselves superior to the Stuarts. If we are talking bloodlines alone, the Stuarts have a clear claim to purity of lineage. As for the Stuarts being “autocrats” so were all the dynasties of England, for all the kings claimed to rule by the grace of God and their right of inheritance.
By Gigi on August 19th, 2007 at 8:13 pm
There were two main issues that resulted in Charles Stuart having his head lopped off. One was that he believed in the Divine Right of Kings, an absolutists Monarchy, and the second was that he was a Catholic. William of Orange was a Protestant and was comfortable to be a Constitutional Monarch. The 1688 constitution made England the first modern state in the world — and very rich.
By John on August 20th, 2007 at 8:28 am
Ahh - the passage of the Bill of Rights was that year. And then the act of settlement - 1701?
JOhn, what was the basis for George 1 selection as king?
By kit on August 20th, 2007 at 3:35 pm
[...] just makes it harder… They can try to open Facebook accounts under pseudonyms, but there are no secrets on the [...]
By Prince William gets engagement ring ultimatum from Kate Middleton & a Cartier Locket on August 20th, 2007 at 6:06 pm