Why? Why? Why .. do these "royal" experts write about royalty, when, in fact, they don't know what they are talking about.
Such is the case of this latest article "Secret Princes Star Lord Robert Walters talks Bromance with William and Harry and his Six Pack video."
Walters insisted that the writer, Kelly Lynch, call him Rob ... and not Lord Rob. Of course, she should call him Rob. Let me repeat for the very dense and uniformed. Robert Walters is not royal, nor he is Lord Robert. He is NOT the younger son of a duke or a marquess.
Lynch said she didn't curtsy. Smart. You don't curtsy to commoners, unless your mother makes you curtsy to your elderly German relatives (and you are only eight years old). Yes, that was me!
Walters allegedly inherited a Lordship of the Manor. This does not make him a peer or give him the right to call himself Lord Rob. I sincerely doubt the manor actually exists these days as Rob himself said as his father lived in Spain.
Unless there is a DNA test to prove that Catherine Carey was Henry VIII's daughter, Henry has no descendants.
Henry was the father of four surviving children: Mary I (Catherine of Aragon), Elizabeth I (Anne Boleyn), Edward VI (Jane Seymour) and Henry Fitzroy, whose mother was Bessie Blount.
Thus, as far as anyone knows, Henry VIII does not have any living descendants.
Moreover, Henry was not Lord of the Manor before he became King. He was Duke of York, and after the death of his elder brother, Arthur, he succeeded as Duke of Cornwall and was named as Prince of Wales.
I also do not think that Rob is best buds with William or Harry. He does not move in their lofty circles.
Check your Debrett's Peerage. Dust off the Burke's Peerage. Pull out your copy of Debrett's Correct Form. Give the facts, not made up froth. It's getting embarrassing.