Tatler wonders why Rose Hanbury & the Cambridges were kept apart at the banquet

Embed from Getty Images

Before the state banquet at Buckingham Palace for Donald Trump, there was speculation that Rose Hanbury would attend, especially since her husband is the Lord Great Chamberlain and has some kind of official capacity at these events. So, people were expecting it. She did show up, but there was a lot of confusion about the general vibe, when she arrived, and where she sat. Buzzfeed’s Ellie Hall did a deep dive on the whole thing – Rose was not part of the procession of royals and Americans, she walked in with Sarah Vine before the formal procession, and she was already at her seat when William and Kate arrived. Rose did not wear her wedding ring but did wear some kind of diamond something in her hair. Her dress was a repeat – she wore the same thing to two other state banquets. And she has walked in the procession line in years past – Ellie Hall says in 2017, she walked behind Will and Kate (who were walking separate from each other) in the procession. Oh, and while Rose was seated not-close to William and Kate on Monday night, she was in Kate’s eyeline and William’s eyeline. Interesting.

So, what else is new? After the story of the alleged Rose-William affair picked up steam and then swiftly died as William used his lawyers to threaten all British media, the story is getting picked up again. There’s no new reporting about an AFFAIR, mind you. The British outlets are just recapping the original shady story, which is that Kate sees Rose as a “rural rival” and that Kate tried to “phase her out.” Interestingly enough, Tatler ran a story about Rose’s presence, and keep in mind that Tatler’s latest editor is Kate’s good friend.

Rumours of a rift spread like wildfire across the media earlier this year. The alleged rift, was, of course, between Norfolk neighbours the Marchioness of Cholmondeley and the Duchess of Cambridge. The supposed rift didn’t stop the Marchioness of Cholmondeley receiving an invitation – and attending – Monday night’s state banquet along with her husband, the Marquess.

The Marquess, who as Lord Great Chamberlain is a regular fixture at state and ceremonial events (and would be expected to bring his wife to the occasion), was seated on the table closest to the Duchess of Cambridge, next to the Duchess of Gloucester. Whereas former model Rose, dressed in floor-length silk (to the Duchess of Cambridge’s white Alexander McQueen), was tactfully placed at the other side of the room. Perhaps to limit photographic opportunities to capture the pair that would be additional fuel for the rumours and spark speculation?

Of course, the majority of couples, if not all of them, appeared to be split between the two tables. The Marchioness was the same distance from Prince William as the Marquess was from the Duchess of Cambridge. The Norfolk neighbours, who live just four miles apart in Houghton and Anmer Hall respectively, were initially thought to be close friends – perhaps no longer so?

[From Tatler]

“Perhaps no longer so?” LOL. If William wanted to flatly deny the affair, he could have. If Rose wanted to flatly deny the affair, she could have. What William did instead was run to Richard Kay and throw his sister-in-law under the bus and throw a massive tantrum about how Kate is an angel on earth who will be queen and has never put a foot wrong. William did it to himself, is what I’m saying. I’m also saying that William and Kate were likely VERY displeased that Rose was there, but again, that was the whole point of the “rural rival” story. I still believe it likely originated with Rose telling Kate, “Silly little middle-class girl, you can’t phase me out, I’m part of this society whether you like it or not.” If you read the whole series of gossip events as Rose asserting her social power, it totally makes sense. And I think that Rose’s appearance at the banquet reinforces that too, sending the message that “real aristocrats socialize with their mistresses and mistresses’ husbands and it’s all fine.”

President Trump state visit to UK - Day One

Photos courtesy of Getty, Avalon Red.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

131 Responses to “Tatler wonders why Rose Hanbury & the Cambridges were kept apart at the banquet”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Sierra says:

    Oh no, here I was expecting a good old fashioned catfight🤷‍♀️

    • ByTheSea says:

      I’m surprised she went. As an invitee of a gossip rag. That is some next level passive aggressive trolling.

      • Maria says:

        Are you referring to Rose? She wasn’t the invitee of a gossip rag, she was there with her husband at an event where he had an official capacity…

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Daily Fail gossip rag person, Sarah Vine, was also attending the banquet in an official capacity as the wife of Michael Gove, MP which is so British.

        Can one imagine Mitch “Yertle-Turtle” McConnell married to the editor of the National Inquirer or In Touch Magazine. LOL!

      • Hyacinth Bucket says:

        She wasn’t, she was her husband’s plus one, Sarah Vine attended as her own husband’s plus one.

      • Tourmaline says:

        @Bay, I would have more respect for Mitch “Yertle-Turtle” McConnell if he was married to a tabloid editor instead of being married to the super-grifting US Secretary of Transportation, Elaine Chao! (see recent NY Times expose on Chao)

      • notasugarhere says:

        She’s the wife of the Lord Great Chamberlain. More gossip if she hadn’t been there.

      • PleaseAndThankYou says:

        Lol!!!! That’s not how things work with the BRF or state events. It’s not the Met Gala or a movie premiere. Sarah Vine is Michael Gove, MP’s wife and plus one (she was only there because Corbyn wasn’t, the only truly dreadful thing about him not being there), and that’s why she was there. Rose Hanbury would always be there, Sarah Vine would not, as Rose’s husband, the Marquess of Cholmondeley, is the Lord Great Chamberlain and his attendance at state events is mandatory.

  2. Rae says:

    Very interesting that it’s Tatler doing the rounds. As you said, they should technically be team Kate, so I would think they’re less likely to run something…hmmm. Watch this space, I guess.

    • Becks1 says:

      “watch this space” – exactly.

    • Melmella says:

      The editor of Tatler went to university with Kate however I doubt they remained close because he wasn’t invited to their wedding despite the long guest list. I think people have overblown this connection & the fact that Tatler are running this story in the first place proves that.

      Lainey was pictured in the past having dinner with Meghan so should we also assume that she & Meghan are still close and that Meghan has been feeding her stories?

      • KEEKS says:

        what does lainey and meghan having dinner have anything to do with norfolk country tiff?

      • olive says:

        @melmella i mean, some people DO assume that about lainey – maybe not that she’s getting stories directly from meghan, but plenty of people here think she’s getting them through jessica mulroney or her husband.

  3. Digital Unicorn says:

    Hmm, someone is stirring and poking William. It could be the affair is still going on and this is Kate passively aggressively getting a dig at William.

    TBH am still not convinced it’s Rose he (William) is/was having an affair with, I still think its someone else and Rose got chucked under the bus to protect that person.

    • Becks1 says:

      Yes, I think William could have had an affair with Rose, but I think its just as likely that Rose was somehow involved (the meet-ups took place at Houghton Hall, or Rose covered for William with Kate, or something) and Kate found out and that was why she tried to “phase her out.”

      I do think its becoming clear that there was a falling out. If there wasn’t, I think the Cambridges would have put in an appearance at the horse trials to put an end to the rumors (since apparently they take these rumors very seriously, what with the legal threats and all.) Why threaten legal action when you can just do a photo op? Unless they really don’t want to do that.

      My tinfoil hat fits nicely today.

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        *adjusts tin foil tiara* Yeah I agree that they’ve had a falling out but given that Rose is also a patron of EACH (Katie Keen’s first patronage and one that she does sod all for) it could be that she said something about her (Katie Keen) lack of interest in promoting their shared patronage. The Chumley’s do a LOT for their local community and they do a lot to fundraise for EACH as well.

        And yeah I believe he had an affair and it could be the press have used Kate and Rose’s falling out as gossip to trigger Big Willy and that they did. We can all agree that there is something about that story that has William scared.

      • Seraphina says:

        Ladies I agree with you both. Something isn’t right and they are trying to cover it up. Whatever the case, I also agree that Rose is sending the future QC that she can’t be phased out.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Rose and her husband playing the role of the Van Cutsems in this scenario makes sense. Kate wrongfully directing her anger at Rose instead of her own (potential) wandering husband.

        Digital Unicorn, do you want to share the Swedish Steel Cut Tiara as our tinfoil hat?

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        @Nota, oh yes. Its a lovely tiara and would be great for communing with the gossip gods.

    • Maria says:

      Eh. I’m gonna have to go with Occam’s Razor on this one. The articles were about Rose, the tweet was about Rose, the focus is on Rose, and she definitely is William’s type, so I’m gonna have to say I think it was her.

      • Becks1 says:

        that could absolutely be true! I can see it going either way. But I will say, that if it wasn’t Rose, then she is probably really ticked at whoever it actually was, since they are hidden and she is dragged into this mess. But you are probably right, rose makes the most sense overall.

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        She is but she had a chance with him years ago and turned him down apparently so why would she change her mind esp when she is married to someone wealthier, a good title, a decent person by most accounts and is way better looking than William. William ran after aristocratic women and they all turned him down. Not just because they didn’t want a Prince because he’s a known mega douche who cheats.

      • Maria says:

        I don’t recall Rose being linked to William years ago…in any case, I can definitely see how, with her own title, her own wealth, her own (better) home in Norfolk, etc, where an affair with the Future King would be a nice feather in her cap, rather than her having to give her life up and her privacy too by actually marrying him.
        But maybe there’s something in what you say. Maybe William DID want her then, and she didn’t want to get serious – but now they’re both settled as it were, it’s easier for her to have an affair with him if she chooses (these circles just do not regard infidelity in the same way as you and I would, just how it is), but maybe William is still emotionally involved (if indeed he always carried a torch for her as is said) and that’s why he’s throwing tantrums about it instead of letting it die.
        All very interesting speculation indeed!

      • PlainJane says:

        I am enjoying these tin foil tiara theories immensely! Thank you! I do second what Maria says, I believe it is Rose (and by any other name, it’s still Rose).

        From Rose’s point of view, why not? Infidelity isn’t that big a deal. She’s got a great hubby, great title, great house, a bunch of cute kids, time on her hands, and she doesn’t have to commit to the wandering scepter. It’s a feather in her cap, by all accounts.

        One thing that bothers me is Little Willy running to the press saying Kate is an angel on earth. This hints at a Madonna/Whore complex when it comes to women. Kate isn’t a person, but someone to serve him, which I guess fits the narrative he has had for her. Rose is someone to use in a different way because he thought he could without consequences. I think Rose leaked this story, and Little Willy didn’t see that coming.

        My armchair analysis for today …

      • Maria says:

        PlainJane – Interesting. With William I feel like it’s that Kate is officially wedded not only to him but to his image and to protect himself he has to protect her – but only in public. I do think Rose leaked it too! All fascinating :-D

    • CatWomen says:

      Isn’t William known to test people by making up something and then watching to see who’s talking about it? I think the original story was Kate and Rose had a tiff, not that he had an affair. So whoever spread the affair rumors is holding the bag, as they say in the USA.

  4. BayTampaBay says:

    The whole truth regarding this story will eventually come out. It may take 10 years but it will come out.

    Forget who cheated on who, IMPO the way this whole mess was handled really makes Bill Cambridge look very petty whereas it appears to me the Cholmondeley’s are trying to ride the storm out by simply rising above it.

    Or maybe the Cholmondeley’s simply do not care what opinions the plebes have on the matter.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      I agree, the Chumley’s are taking the high rode and they are letting the Cambridges throw eggs all over their own faces with the PR mess that William created.

      As I said above am not convinced its Rose he was/is having an affair with – I still think its someone else and she got thrown under the bus to protect that person and she is fighting back.

  5. aquarius64 says:

    That editor at Tatler can’t be that good of a friend of Kate otherwise the story would not have run.

    The queen has the final stay who comes to these events and a Rose no show just increases the gossip. However this could be karma on William for weaponizing Bad Dad on Meghan (because Sr went after the BRF in the process) and unleashing his lawyers that end up keeping the story alive.

  6. Becks1 says:

    Well, things like the seating etc would have been handled by palace staff, and would have been done according to the “protocol” (I am starting to hate that word lol), so I don’t think that means anything. Most couples sit apart, Will and Kate always walk in separately (as do Charles and Camilla), etc. So I am not reading anything into that. The part about Rose being in the eyeline of both Will and Kate is kind of funny though. here, let’s take this awkward state dinner and make it even more awkward!

    What I do find interesting at this point is that Tatler is running this story. Even if it is full of nothing-burger gossip, like who sat where, its interesting to me because it signals that this story is not dying down really, and that there may be some fire to all that smoke. Like you pointed out Kaiser, Kate knows the editor, so I don’t think this would be published just for fun.

  7. Louise says:

    My question is, why was a Daily Mail gossip reporter invited to the state banquet? And why was she walking with Rose?

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      That reporter is the wife of Michael Gove, a senior Conservative (Tory) MP who could be the next British Prime Minister. He was also at the banquet.

    • Becks1 says:

      Her husband is a politician (I think some on here have said he’s a distant possibility for PM?)

    • BayTampaBay says:

      The Daily Fail reporter, whose name is Sarah Vine, is married to Michael Gove who is an MP and I believe is in Theresa May’s cabinet. Rose Hanbury interned for Michael Gove after she finished university.

      Put on your tinfoil hat, I am adding 1 and 1 and coming up with 11: Rose is friends or at least friendly with the Daily Fail reporter. Could this be a visual message meant for Carol Middleton?

    • Tia says:

      She’s married to Michael Gove who is one of the three top contenders for being the next U.K. Prime Minister (and the change over will occur in the next couple of weeks).

    • Gia says:

      Blame Will for not choosing a less-well-connected mistress/affair.

  8. Cidy says:

    I mean, having to constantly hear about the woman your husband had an affair with is bad enough now shes making “power moves?” Jesus. That would be devastating. You have three kids with a man and he sleeps with your friend, that’s heartbreaking.

    I honestly feel a level of respect and sympathy for Kate. I wouldnt go anywhere, or see anything or do anything. My last relationship ended because of infidelity and it’s still so embarassing. For your marriage to be unravelling in the public eye has got to be hard. I know she probably understood what she was marrying into before she married Bill, but that doesnt take away the sadness of the situation.

    • Maria says:

      It’s been the pattern for years, unfortunately.
      There are stories about Jecca Craig and William that made me sad for Kate – the two things that really stood out for me about that were William ignoring Kate at his own 21st birthday party, and then the stories about how William would confide in Jecca about Diana and not Kate, and that just made Kate even sadder and lonelier.
      There is an article with her former boss from Jigsaw out there. Kate stated she had a life she couldn’t dictate and that she had to be around for William at all times. It is obvious this had an extremely detrimental effect on her ability to make her own life and friends. And I think after so many years it just became habit.
      I think Kate deserves better and I do think at times she felt she deserved better too, but when she brought this up he’d dump her and then her family (especially her mother, and probably Pippa too who had a sisterly rivalry with Kate as to who would marry better, from many accounts) would pressure her so much to just get back together and not make waves. Anyone remember the Vanity Fair story about Carole having a picture of William as her phone wallpaper?
      Thankfully Kate now has a level of protection in her status and her life; I think at this point, she’ll look the other way if it isn’t public. But it has become public, sadly.

    • Hyacinth Bucket says:

      I feel bad for Kate, but she knew what she was getting into when she determined to sacrifice everything to pursue a man who a) had a girlfriend at the time b) kept dumping her c) treated her like crap and d) clearly wasn’t that into her, because she wanted to be Queen one day. I’m sure she knew her relationship wasn’t and would never be a traditional love match and she was okay with that.

      • notasugarhere says:

        This. She chose to pursue him for 10 plus years knowing this about him. The only time she broke up with him, or protested his behavior in public? It was when he cheated publicly. As long as he kept it quiet, she stayed with him and put up with it. Her years of controlling behavior and meangirling any women in the set who were near him. Her version of peeing around him and marking her territory.

      • Gia says:

        She will learn to deal with mistresses, I suppose.

      • Casey20 says:

        It doesn’t negate that William is an A-hole! I’m not a huge Kate fan. Yes, she waited years for a ring from an A-hole. Yes, she’s clueless and an empthy vessel. Yes, she is work shy. I can go on and on…… but Willliam married her and she is the mother of his children. He could show her some respect! To expect any woman to sit quietly while her husband parades his mistress around is delusional. Kate’s right to shut that shi* down!!!

    • 90sgirl says:

      He took about a decade to decide to marry Kate. They always had breakups and there were behind the scenes rumours of cheating , he publicly dumped her and shouted I’m Free, I’m Free and let’s drink the menu! This is not someone who Kate married with her eyes closed. I think she knew he might rove his eye , but she was willing to look the other way. I think her problem now is that it became public and with someone close.

      What if when they married there was a silent agreement, just don’t embarrass me and don’t play close to Home.

      I always got the feeling that Kate wanted the ring so badly, that she convinced herself and William that she’d put up with anything as long as it wasn’t embarrassing.

      • Casey20 says:

        Probably so, but she can change her mind and deserves respect as his wife! Kate probably doesn’t have anyone supporting her. I’m sure Carole is telling her to put up with it so that she can maintain her status as mother-in-law to the future King and Queen!!

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Casey20, Is Carole Middleton really that disgusting? Does Bill Cambridge mean more to her than her own daughter?

      • Casey20 says:

        Yes, she is! Carole and PC over the last year have reached some type of peace. Before that it was all out war. TQ had to step in on a few occassions. As TQ has given more power to PC, Carole’s power over PW/Kate has dwindled. No more photos of she and George at the park etc.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        I guess Carole Middleton met her match when she tried to tangle with the “Chumleys” via the Daily Fail or “and-or-whomever”!

        Carole would fit right in with the cast of ‘Ladies of London” except she sold her home in London. LOL!

  9. tempest prognosticator says:

    This is like watching a soap opera, which is kind of delicious. I think I’m in the minority, though, because I see Rose as the antagonist. I have a tendency to root for the underdog and, believe it or not, I see Kate as the underdog.

    • Becks1 says:

      I kind of think they both are the antagonists, depending on what point in the story we are discussing, ha. I think Rose is the one who leaked to the press the initial “rural rival” and phasing out story. I think something happened (I assume an affair with someone, but who knows) that caused Kate and Rose to have the mysterious falling out, and then Kate made a move to cut Rose out, thinking that would end it. Rose wasn’t having that and leaked that bit of gossip, which she had to know would start tongues wagging. So I think Rose set this whole thing in motion for the public.

      Overall I do feel bad for Kate in this situation, soap opera aspect of this aside. Someone commented above that its hard to have your marriage unravel in the public eye, and I agree. I think like many aspects of her marriage, she thought she knew what she was getting into, and has found out that she was wrong.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I could see a friend of Rose being the one to leak it if Kate tried an end run to cut Rose out of the set. It could be because there was an affair between Rose and William, there is only heavy flirting and William being emotionally invested, or even Kate blaming Rose and her husband for enabling William’s affairs. Kate wrongfully blaming Rose not William.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      @tempest prognosticator, I agree with all that you say regarding Kate. However, there is much more to this story that we do not know because the puzzle pieces do not fit:

      #1 William going to a lawyer, WHY?

      #2 The really really weird Richard Kay story in the Daily Fail, WHY

      #3 Tatler picking up on this 3-4 month old story so it will not die…..reporting on a story they do not want to be seen as reporting on, WHY?

      #4 The Cholmondeley’s basically remaining silent, keeping calm and carrying on as usual, This makes sense to me

      #5 The large promotional article in Tatler regarding the latest annual exhibition at Houghton Hall, David and Rose must be really really close to the editors at Tatler to get this type of coverage

      #6 Very weird Twitter/IG post from well connected hangars on, Does someone have it out for Bill Cambridge due to something not connected with Turnip Toffgate?

      This story is weird and getting weird by the day and I am absolutely loving it!

      • L84Tea says:

        Same here! Bring me all the tea!

      • Tina says:

        I absolutely understand why the first three things happened. William went to a lawyer because he wanted to scare the papers into submission. That plus whatever influence the Queen was willing to throw at this (which I suspect was some but not much, as she has Andrew to protect and even HM’s ability to muzzle the papers is not unlimited) was enough to get them to shut up. The Richard Kay story was also classic William overreach, he’s not nearly as smart as he thinks he is. And half of Tatler’s MO is gossip that only a few people actually understand.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Got this from another site:

        The Rose Hanbury story was broken by Eden Confidential at the Daily Mail, reported by the Sunday Times with independent sources and confirmed by other tabloids.

        Who or what is Eden Confidential?

        “confirmed by other tabloids”, Don’t ya just love it?

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Deleted comments

      • Meganbot2000 says:

        Eden Confidential is the name of a Daily Mail column written by their columnist Richard Eden.

  10. Sassy says:

    Seeing as Tatler is like the school newspaper for Britain’s elite it’s interesting that they would run this story.

  11. AprilMay says:

    The whole will she be there thing is BS. Its literally her job as long as shes married to the Marquess. She will always be there unless they divorce or he dies in which case the Lord Chamberlain role will pass onto his eldest son. They will continue be at every State Banquet while the Queens alive and then when Charles is King and when William is King unless they are to ill to attend. This family is in the royal familys lives as long as the monarchy exists.

    • Mego says:

      This is the situation plain and simple.

    • Becks1 says:

      Which is why its interesting that Tatler ran this story, which is basically a non story. Rose was always going to be there. And she sat where she sat because that’s where she was told to sit. But Tatler is trying to make it into a thing.

      • NessaBee says:

        Tatler ran the story because they like clicks to their website :) Tatler also ran the story about the art expositions at the Cholmondleys because its an art show at a stately home and that’s their wheelhouse. I agree, this is a non-story…

    • Tourmaline says:

      Agree, of course she was there, she will be at these things as long as she is married to her husband, and as Tatler ends up saying, it is a non-story and there is nothing interesting about where she was sitting in the banquet hall. As to her wedding ring, I haven’t seen enough pictures of Rose in the public domain to judge which rings she wears and when and if there is anything notable about that.

      As to why Tatler ran the story, well it’s for the click-bait of it all. Tatler needs clicks just like any rag does!

    • notasugarhere says:

      The Lord Great Chamberlain position is shared between two families. It should rotate away during Charles’s reign and back to the Cholmondeley line for William’s.

      • Moneypenny says:

        That is unfortunate for William :) .

      • BayTampaBay says:

        But quite fortunate for us Royal gossip-mongers! LOL!

      • BeanieBean says:

        Who’s the other family? Just curious & too lazy to google.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Do not know the exact succession but Camilla’s relatives/family are in the line of succession through her Great-Grandfather via the Earls of Albemarle.

      • Maria says:

        I very much want to say after a bit of googling that Rupert Carington, the current Lord Carrington, is currently up for it, yes Camilla’s cousin Rufus Keppel is part of the family but the position of the Lord Great Chamberlain rotates proportionately to how much of the position any descendant holds.
        Two nieces of the final Duke of Ancaster and Kesteven (one was married to the Marquess of Cholmondeley) in the 18th century were granted the office of Lord Chamberlain and so it rotates between, but because the Cholmondeley side has always had a male heir it holds an entire half of the office, and the other family has been split several times because of female inheritance, which leaves certain bits inherited between the branches, in their turn. I believe Lord Carrington is next in this hierarchy, then it would rotate back to the Cholmondeleys, THEN Rufus Keppel would get it? Not sure so much of that, but that’s what I concluded.
        This took so much googling so forgive me if I’m proud of my newly acquired knowledge. I was today years old when I found out what a moiety title is.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Maria, Thanks for your update! I was too tired after a long day and several glasses of wine to do all the research. Thanks again!

      • Maria says:

        Sure thing! I’ll be reading this all night, lol!

  12. Mego says:

    Falling out with the Hanbury’s, falling out with the Sussexes. Hmm lots of falling out going on with the Cambridges these days.

  13. Eyfalia says:

    I checked it, but the dress Rose wore at the Trump state visit and at the visit of the Spanish Royals looks similar but it is not the same. Two different dresses.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      Thanks for the update on the dresses. More please!

    • BayTampaBay says:

      @Eyfalia, I went Googling for pictures of Rose at the 2017 Spanish State Banquet. I could not find any good ones. However, I am firmly convinced the dress for the 2017 Spanish State Banquet and the dress worn for the 2019 USA State Banquet are two different dresses.

      It could also be that Rose had the 2017 dress re-cut, altered and redesigned to wear in 2019 because necklines are completely different. However, the fabric appears to be very different too. The 2019 dress is a “shiny” material and the 2017 dress shows up more “matte” as in a silk-cotton blend material .

      If anyone has links to the 2017 Spanish Sate Banquet Rose Hanbury dress, please post.

  14. LORENA says:

    Maybe there has not been much reporting because there isn’t much to report on?

    • BayTampaBay says:

      @Lorena, Agreed! Then why not just let this story die?

      • Maria says:

        I really feel like this is the tip of the iceberg, I’m really surprised to see several NEW articles lately about how crappy William was to Kate in the dating years…
        It’ll take a while to get to the bottom of it, but something’s in the water.

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        @Maria – Plus the many new news stories about Kate having a 4th baby and how Meghan is desperate to leave the UK to get out of Kate’s shadow.

        Someone really wants us to stop paying attention to this. All is not well in Cambridge land. This is his parents divorce drama all over again.

    • Kylie says:

      @Lorena

      I agree. I mean of course neither party made a public denial. If they did, people would claim the denial was proof something happened. Every option is a no won situation.

      • Becks1 says:

        Except, they could have just said nothing. There are lots of non-stories out there about the royals. I don’t see reporters insinuating they aren’t allowed to write about every other non-story. And they write blatantly false things often enough. the fact that legal action was threatened is what takes this up a notch, as has been said here repeatedly.

        If there was no affair, and William was just trying to shut down the rumors, he was effective in a way, but he also made it seem like there was something to the rumors. That Richard Kay article, and the subsequent threatening of legal action as reported in the Daily Beast, were huge missteps, if nothing happened.

      • Kylie says:

        I’ve never been convinced that William was the one who went to Kay. The Marquess and Marchioness are pretty connected to Kay.

      • Maria says:

        If William wasn’t the one who went to Kay why didn’t he react negatively to the story?
        And why would there be so much negative coverage of Meghan? What do the Cholmondeleys care about her actions?
        It was quite clearly William.

      • Kylie says:

        The media has been negative about Meghan since the beginning. There is a reason Harry released that statement back in 2016. The media never needed anyone to encourage them to edit racist garbage about Meghan.

      • Maria says:

        I would agree with you EXCEPT that this had everything to do with comparing her to Kate’s every move and then mentioning Kate’s unshakeable popularity with the public compared to Meghan’s. There is no reason for the Cholmondeleys or Kay to make that statement on their own– the sycophancy is nauseating and it’s false from start to end. It is obviously from William.

    • starryfish29 says:

      Because that typically stops the british tabloids? lol.

    • Hyacinth Bucket says:

      Multiple journalists have openly stated on Twitter (eg the most recent tweet about the editor hurling himself over the desk) that they are not allowed to print anything about Rose or this “rivalry”, and we’ve all read the original incredibly heavy handed legal letter William’s team sent out following the original “Kate’s had a falling out with a neighbour” article, which was incredibly innocuous and didn’t even imply cheating.

      There’s heavy, heavy legal censorship.

      Stories not being true didn’t stop the tabloids reporting on loads of random Meghan nonsense.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Wasn’t there a tweet (now deleted) from a BBC reporter saying there was an affair and everyone talking about an affair, but legally they were being shut down and not allowed to pursue it?

      • Beach Dreams says:

        @nota: there was a tweet from a former IPSO officer who said that he heard several media figures talking about the media blackout. A BBC journalist responded to confirm that there was a blackout but she deleted her tweet afterward. Another reporter replied and said that it was a self imposed blackout, comparable to *that* situation with Edward in 1936.

    • MA says:

      I mean the UK press managed to publish entire articles about Meghan’s knees, handwriting, avocados, and the how her name tastes.

  15. Lizzie says:

    no amount of money and fame is worth having to eat shit in front of your husband’s side piece…i’m glad i’m not an aristocrat.

    • vava says:

      +1
      This entire lifestyle sounds really gross to me. So glad to be a plebe. I can’t imagine having to go to functions like this. I’d be bored to tears, and would hate having to deal with the dress code.

  16. TheOriginalMia says:

    Tatler knows Rose attends because of her husband. Tatler knows the seating arrangement is done by palace staff according to rank. Tatler knows all of this because it has been covering this set for eons. So why is Tatler covering this story like they don’t know protocol? Because they want William and Kate to know they have no power amongst the aristocratic set. They have more money, less rules and upstarts, future monarchs they may be, aren’t going to upset the apple cart because of an affair.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      @TheOriginalMia, splendid description of what is known to date.

      Have also heard/read the titled aristocracy and wealthy landed gentry set have very strict rules on how one behaves and you never break the rules or the whole set will turn you and circle the wagons around whomever you provoked to protect them and the set in general.

    • Frida_K says:

      This is interesting–I had never thought of it this way, @TheOriginalMia.

      If the Queen herself wanted to cut them out, would she have that power, or do you think that the aristocratic set has the numbers and thus can ultimately choose to circle wagons even against HRM?

      This all seems to petty and bizarre and childish, but it is also interesting in a creepy, train wreck sort of a way.

      • TheOriginalMia says:

        @Frida_K, TQ knows the rules. She can’t cut them because David is The Lord Great Chamberlain. His place is set. Regardless of any hurt feelings, protocol must be adhered to. I also doubt she’s that concerned about William’s wandering spectre when her own husband and children have cheated on their spouses. It happens. Rage in private. Keep up appearances in public. Burning the whole system down is just not done.

      • Frida_K says:

        Thank you, @TheOriginalMia. That makes sense. It’s nutty as squirrel poo, as it were, and I’d rather not live that way, but yes, I see your point.

      • Lady D says:

        “some (wo)men just want to watch the world burn” – Alfred to Batman.
        Kate might get divorced and write a really good book:)

  17. HK9 says:

    Ok, for someone who doesn’t get the intricacies of British aristocracy, this is a Game of Thronesesque Jedi mind f-k. So, Tatler, who’s editor is a friend of Kate has run a story that brings this up again?? I thought she’d want to bury a story like this, or at least not add fuel to the fire. Hmmmm, while I was one of the ones who was hoping it was Kate & Rose having an affair (Ha!) I took this story with a boulder of salt. After this though, I think something’s amiss.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      “while I was one of the ones who was hoping it was Kate & Rose having an affair (Ha!)”

      or Bill Cambridge and David Rocksavage having the affair (double Ha!)

      I think there was an affair but I also think there is much more to this story than just an aristocratic roll in the hay.

      • HK9 says:

        Yeah, it’s pretty clear that whatever was wrong is still wrong and it’s not going away.

    • Surly Gale says:

      I still think it’s not an affair at all….Rose told Catherine how to raise her kids and Wham! Done and done

  18. Cee says:

    I feel sorry for Kate. She made a power move and found out she has no power at all.
    You don’t phase out a Marchioness married to TQ’s Lord Great Chamberlain. Even Diana couldn’t phase out Camilla and she was POW! Goes to show those marrying into the RF have no power at all.

    She needs to have a talk with Cersei Lannister.

    • Maria says:

      Really at this stage I’d be pulling loads of Margaery Tyrell moves around Rose.

      • HK9 says:

        Yes. That’s exactly the way you need to handle this situation. Kate also needs to remember Cersi’s “power is power” lesson…….someone just needs to send the GOT books to Kate’s assistant.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      Kate’s mistake was thinking that being Williams GF gave her status and status above them. A status she and her family loved to flaunt. I worked with aristo’s and am from a working class background. I never had any problems with them and was never treated in any way that I felt I was less than they were – I found them to be down to earth, friendly and respectful as I was to them in return. What I did see was that they did not react well to those who pretended to be someone/something they’re not – people who thought that their or their families wealth made them equal in status to Lords and Ladies.

      ‘Phasing out’ people from a social circle is juvenile but then again Kate was notorious for this. There were many stories from the dating years that if William showed any interest in any of her friends she’d cut that friend out. And I would question just how many of these people in the Turnip Toff set are Kate’s friends, probably they are/were Williams friends/acquaintances.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @DU, I have come across a few aristos in my life and my experience is much like yours. IMHE with this set, the aristos I have meet are more down-to-earth than most people as they have nothing to prove and seemed very comfortable in their own skin. What they hate & detest are phonies, fake snobs & nobs who have nothing to be snobby about and people that like to go around “putting-on-the dog”.

  19. Nia says:

    they Should stop putting megjan’s Name in every nasty story.It always backfires 😂

  20. Another Anne says:

    Was Rose really a model?? She seems…basic, at best.

    • Lady D says:

      There are links in yersterday’s story about this that show Rose modelling. I think she looked beautiful in those pictures. However, as someone recently pointed out, when we say ‘looked better’ we usually mean looked younger, and Rose is in those shots.
      For the record, I think she is very pretty.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        I always though Rose was very pretty in a non-classical but very Bohemian in that roll-out-of-bed, brush your teeth, put on clean undies and out the door wearing whatever is laying in the chair beside the bed way.

    • Beach Dreams says:

      She was a ‘model’ in the typical sense that young, high society British women tend to be: some photo shoots for Tatler and similar types of magazines, and maybe a few clothing brand ads here and there, but that’s about it. Cara Delevingne seems to be the rare and very successful exception, but she had some very powerful connections herself.

  21. Seraphina says:

    I’m just gonna say it: Damn, she looks rough in that pic. Way rough. Well, I guess being in a relationship (even just for sex) with Wills takes it toll.

    • schmootc says:

      The hair in particular is just not terribly flattering when you look at it close-up, like in the thumbnail photo.

  22. 90sgirl says:

    There is one glimpse way in the back of one photo of Kate chatting with one of the Trump sons. The only reason I noticed Kate in back is because it’s one of the photos with Trump, Melania and I think Charles and Camilla posing. Kate is way in back in the hallway with the Trump sons .
    I think it’s the one with Tiffany or someone Who looked similar ,in back , looking up at a chandelier. I only saw it once. Maybe someone can spot it.

  23. Gia says:

    It seems to make some people happy when they can point out that Kate had to deal with her hubby’s mistress.

  24. Fluffy Princess says:

    God I love this story!

    I set these aside to read when I have time because I so enjoy the commentary!!

    I hope this story doesn’t die, and the “Chumley’s” stay in the gossip news for awhile.

    I have to say I did love how blase Rose seems about attending the state dinner. Tiara arranged uniquely in the back of her hair, a possible re-done dress, minimal jewelry — like she just “threw something on” and grabbed her bag and went. It’s obvious she feels comfortable in her place in the aristocracy–and that she is not insecure in the least. If she was, I bet she would have made more of an effort to look completely amazing–but she’s like, “Whatevs–just another Tuesday night for the Chumley’s hob-nobbing with world leaders and what nots. Ho hum.”

    • BayTampaBay says:

      @Fluffy Princess, You described Rose exactly as I imagine her to be and I imagine David Rocksavage to be much the same after years spent hob-nobbing with world leaders, the heavy hitters in the motion picture industry, reigning UK politicians, major players in the art world plus movers & shakers in the fashion industry.

      • Fluffy Princess says:

        Exactly! I imagine David and Rose as the cool kids—self-assured, confident, and not ruffled by “controversy.” They will keep on with their fabulous life , their wonderful philanthropy efforts, and let’s not forget their amazing home and castle…whereas Bill and Cathy seem so…try hard. Trying to keep up with the cool kids, but not quite making it.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Fluffy Princess,

        Wanted to add: I have friends in Norfolk, England that have told me that Rose & David are highly respected in their Norfolk community and not just for raising money for charity. They are more than willing to roll up their designer sleeves and actually do real and productive work if and when needed. Sorta like in the USA actually volunteering 10-15 hours a month (or year) to work for Habitat for Humanity or as Harry has done in Africa. Not a perfect example of what my friends told me about the work of the “Chumley’s but the closet analogy I could come up with.

    • MA says:

      She looks very cool, effortless chic

  25. Vi says:

    At this point everyone will believe what they want. I don’t know what is behind this alleged rivalry,or if it’s even true. But these pseudo rumors were denied. What couldn’t be denied is something that wasn’t written. But since it was clear what tabloids like The sun were doing,republishing the story two,three times,I don’t see anything wrong if William took legal action to prevent a series of rumors that were really damaging for his family from escalating. It’s not the same as having gossips about staff leaving.. The fact that he ran to Key “to throw his SIL under the bus” still doesn’t make sense to me. Even if we assume that William asked him to write about it,and I don’t think that was the case when the piece was totally written to fuel speculation,throwing Meghan under the bus was not the purpose.
    Richard Key literally repeated the same things about them a few days later when he wrote another piece that was meant to be glowing about M&H. Richard key doesn’t like W&K and he doesn’t like M&H. Every opportunity is good for writers like him to throw shade,above all because they know what instigates the crowds in one way or another.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      @Vi, Would you not think that Bill Cambridge would be smart enough to know that Richard Kay does not like him so therefore would go to anther journalist who does like to feed a story he wanted to be published? Are these people (read Bill Cambridge) really that STUPID????

      I would love to have all the tea why Richard Kay does not like W&K and H&M? Inquiring minds want to know! LOL! LOL!

      • Vi says:

        In fact I don’t believe he asked RK to write anything. It was a malicious piece masked as faux praise that was written to draw attention to these rivalry rumors that were going unnoticed.
        The fact that he doesn’t like any of them is quite evident judging by his pieces,and it’s why I doubt he needs William to write what he usually writes about M&H.. To be honest,I don’t think some of the criticism I’ve seen coming from him (about both couples) was completely unreasonable. But maybe for sensationalistic reasons,it’s often very heavy handed.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Vi, Thanks for your response.

      • Maria says:

        Vi, for a moment you changed my mind completely – but for the fact that William did not respond to Kay’s piece (as far as I know, I can be corrected), but he did to the other reporters trying to uncover this, and then I think it really was William.

  26. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    This is all set by the order of precedence, so it has nothing to do with any alleged affair. The order in which people arrive, where they are seated at dinner, etc. — that is all according to the person’s place in the order of precedence. The British tabloids should know that.

  27. Becks1 says:

    It has appeared ;-)

  28. Digital Unicorn says:

    There were several stories in the press yesterday about that and about how his crotch goblins were kept away from photo’s ops as well. There is group photo of the Trumps and TQ & Charles/Cams with the crotch goblins lurking in the background eyeing up the chandelier’s with the rest of the BRF standing around. There was no official photo ops and from what I can gather it was made sure they didn’t take any selfies.

  29. IlsaLund says:

    It would be just like the Crotch goblins to try and sneak a selfie of themselves with the Royals. You know it’d be plastered all over social media. So happy they got zilch to show off and brag about.

  30. TheOriginalMia says:

    The Crotch Goblins took a picture outside BP in front of a sign that said photography was not permitted. They were desperate to show they had made it. Now info is coming out that they were glorified party crashers. The only ones invited were Trump and Melania, and cabinet members like Mnuchin. The rest tagged along because grifters are gonna grift. Another family vacation on our dimes.