tiffanytwisted
Pearl Clutcher
you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave
Posts: 4,538
Jun 26, 2014 15:57:39 GMT
|
Post by tiffanytwisted on Aug 1, 2014 2:43:10 GMT
Actually, I'm sure there are American, Canadian, Australian, etc. Peas who can answer this as well.
I just read in an old issue of People magazine that Zara Phillips holds no title. Is that true? If so, why is that? Is it because her mother isn't first in line for the throne? Does that apply to Beatrice, Eugenie, Louise & James as well?
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Aug 1, 2014 2:45:48 GMT
I heard somewhere that Princess Anne gave up her title or the right for her children to have titles or something like that when she got married. Of course I can remember NO details. I'm sure the UK or Commonwealth peas can answer your questions better than I can. So ignore my rambling. sigh
|
|
|
Post by Eddie-n-Harley on Aug 1, 2014 2:47:28 GMT
I heard somewhere that Princess Anne gave up her title or the right for her children to have titles or something like that when she got married. Of course I can remember NO details. I'm sure the Commonwealth peas can answer your questions better than I can. So ignore my rambling. sigh That meshes with my recollection of stuff I read before Will and Kate got married.
|
|
|
Post by seikashaven on Aug 1, 2014 2:47:55 GMT
My understanding is that because she's only related to the monarchy on the maternal side she is not eligible for a Royal title. I don't believe her father has a title of his own.
|
|
|
Post by miss_lizzie on Aug 1, 2014 2:51:51 GMT
I thought Princess Anne deliberately chose that her children would not have titles even though they were eligible for them.
|
|
tiffanytwisted
Pearl Clutcher
you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave
Posts: 4,538
Jun 26, 2014 15:57:39 GMT
|
Post by tiffanytwisted on Aug 1, 2014 2:55:32 GMT
My understanding is that because she's only related to the monarchy on the maternal side she is not eligible for a Royal title. I don't believe her father has a title of his own. But then how does that work w/Charles, Andrew, Anne & Edward? They are only royal on the maternal side. According to Wikipedia (not the best source, I know), his wife gave him the title of prince. I heard somewhere that Princess Anne gave up her title or the right for her children to have titles or something like that when she got married. Of course I can remember NO details. I'm sure the UK or Commonwealth peas can answer your questions better than I can. So ignore my rambling. sigh Interesting . . . wonder why she would do that? Guess I'll have to wait for the UK Peas to wake up.
|
|
ctencza
Shy Member
Posts: 39
Jun 27, 2014 0:43:36 GMT
|
Post by ctencza on Aug 1, 2014 2:56:37 GMT
The lineage goes through the highest ranking royal parent. It does not matter if one parent is a commoner or not. Because Anne's daughter had a minuscule chance of getting the throne (all 3 of Anne's brother any and all male children would have to die first) she renounced her daughters title at birth.
|
|
|
Post by Eddie-n-Harley on Aug 1, 2014 2:59:38 GMT
|
|
tiffanytwisted
Pearl Clutcher
you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave
Posts: 4,538
Jun 26, 2014 15:57:39 GMT
|
Post by tiffanytwisted on Aug 1, 2014 3:02:34 GMT
Yes, I could have. I just thought it would be more fun to have a discussion about it.
|
|
|
Post by Eddie-n-Harley on Aug 1, 2014 3:04:25 GMT
Yes, I could have. I just thought it would be more fun to have a discussion about it. I didn't mean to be snarky. Should have added a smiley. I opted to look it up cuz it was bugging me. I think that things might have been different if Zara had been born now, since Parliament changed the succession rules just in case Prince George had been a princess.
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Aug 1, 2014 3:13:03 GMT
Thank you! Interesting article. I wish I had been more of a Royal follower over the years. I know just enough to get me in trouble, not enough to be an expert.
|
|
tiffanytwisted
Pearl Clutcher
you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave
Posts: 4,538
Jun 26, 2014 15:57:39 GMT
|
Post by tiffanytwisted on Aug 1, 2014 3:13:09 GMT
Yes, I could have. I just thought it would be more fun to have a discussion about it. I didn't mean to be snarky. Should have added a smiley. I opted to look it up cuz it was bugging me. I think that things might have been different if Zara had been born now, since Parliament changed the succession rules just in case Prince George had been a princess. Thanx - I actually thought you were probably kidding around, but it's past my bedtime and my skin is thinner. I can see the point where she led a much freer life w/out the title, but it is interesting how both Eugenie & Beatrice are princesses. Even Edward's children have titles. Yes, I kept googling, lol. Seems like Zara & her brother got the shaft.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 7, 2024 0:24:46 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 4:29:58 GMT
I didn't mean to be snarky. Should have added a smiley. I opted to look it up cuz it was bugging me. I think that things might have been different if Zara had been born now, since Parliament changed the succession rules just in case Prince George had been a princess. Thanx - I actually thought you were probably kidding around, but it's past my bedtime and my skin is thinner. I can see the point where she led a much freer life w/out the title, but it is interesting how both Eugenie & Beatrice are princesses. Even Edward's children have titles. Yes, I kept googling, lol. Seems like Zara & her brother got the shaft. Why do you think they got the shaft? To me it seems like they were released from a great burden. I don't see how that is getting the shaft. They are free to pursue what interests them personally instead of being restricted to what "befits a royal" and yet they still have the connections and access to all the support they would have had if they had titles. They are free to meet and marry as they choose instead of just among a select circle of people. They can choose or decline charity activities based on their values instead of value to the whole royal image. So I don't get what the down side is in your view.
|
|
tiffanytwisted
Pearl Clutcher
you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave
Posts: 4,538
Jun 26, 2014 15:57:39 GMT
|
Post by tiffanytwisted on Aug 1, 2014 5:11:14 GMT
Guess I should have added a smiley, too. I was just thinking it would be cool to have 'princess' or 'lady' before my name. Just a fluff thing.
|
|
anniebygaslight
Drama Llama
I'd love a cup of tea. #1966
Posts: 7,402
Location: Third Rock from the sun.
Jun 28, 2014 14:08:19 GMT
|
Post by anniebygaslight on Aug 1, 2014 5:40:34 GMT
It is because her parents did not want either her or her brother Peter to have titles.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 7, 2024 0:24:46 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 5:50:14 GMT
I think Disney has made being a princess look cool. But Princess Anne knows the reality of what her kids would be saddled with by being titled. They still have the access to all the affluence, social connections, privileged education as if they had been titled. I guess I'm not enamored with titles enough to understand why it would be cool to have one before my name. I'm not even terribly fond of Mrs or Ms.
|
|
BarbaraUK
Drama Llama
Surrounded by my yarn stash on the NE coast of England...............!! Refupea 1702
Posts: 5,961
Location: England UK
Jun 27, 2014 12:47:11 GMT
|
Post by BarbaraUK on Aug 1, 2014 6:29:13 GMT
Princess Anne's official title is The Princess Royal. When she had Peter and Zara she decided that they shouldn't have titles.
|
|
|
Post by anniefb on Aug 1, 2014 6:33:08 GMT
Here's what the Daily Mail had to say on the subject when Princess Anne turned 60 a few years ago
|
|
|
Post by gar on Aug 1, 2014 6:47:14 GMT
Where's jennyap when you need her - she is pretty knowledgeable about the Royal Family if I remember correctly but as I recall it was Princess Anne and Mark Phillips choice for their children. I know it isn't anything to do with Cap't Mark Phillips being a commoner nor were they shafted I believe they thought it would help to give their children a degree of normality in their upbringing.
|
|
|
Post by pmk on Aug 1, 2014 7:00:16 GMT
I think they're probably correct too - there was none of the intrusive press coverage when the children were younger (first birthday, first day at school etc) that other Royals have had. I'm not sure what 'benefit' the titles would have given them considering how far away from the throne they are?
|
|
BarbaraUK
Drama Llama
Surrounded by my yarn stash on the NE coast of England...............!! Refupea 1702
Posts: 5,961
Location: England UK
Jun 27, 2014 12:47:11 GMT
|
Post by BarbaraUK on Aug 1, 2014 7:11:23 GMT
I think that things might have been different if Zara had been born now, since Parliament changed the succession rules just in case Prince George had been a princess. No I don't think it would have altered Princess Anne's thinking on this. She is the second child of The Queen and succession goes down the line of the first born so the more children William and Kate have the further down the line of succession Peter and Zara go. Anne's husband didn't/doesn't hold a title, and didn't want a courtesy title and it seems the decision about titles for the children were also decided then.
|
|
|
Post by stargazer on Aug 1, 2014 10:14:34 GMT
Princess Anne is a very down to earth, practical woman & it was her choice for her children not to have titles. I can definitely see why she did it & they have bothade good independant lives for themselves.
|
|
|
Post by hop2 on Aug 1, 2014 11:18:27 GMT
After having been in London when Prince George was born, and seeing all the crazy insane press, if what she did gets rid of any fraction of that she did them a favor.
I was so, so sad about how crazy the press went last year. I mean here this young couple, brand new first time parents, bring their child out of the hospital by the 'front' door ( I'm sure they had options to avoid that ) and took the time to show him to the press, and still it was crazy. The press set up about 50 trucks with fifty generators that must have hummed non stop for god knows how long right next to where they were living with their brand new baby. And those were the 'normal' press people. Sime crazy yahoos were claiming the walls and trees around the home to take pictures of the windows they might be behind. Crazy camera people lined the streets going in and out swarming any remotely fancy car that even slowed down near the driveway. And since there is a stop light right near there that was quite a few. I saw this all first hand because we happened to have a tour scheduled right there unknown to us they would stay there. I refused to look, to take my camera out or anything I was so appalled at what was going on. It was insane, and IMHO unfair. So yea if princess Anne save her children any measure of that then bravo!
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 7, 2024 0:24:46 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 11:22:59 GMT
Princess Anne is a very down to earth, practical woman & it was her choice for her children not to have titles. I can definitely see why she did it & they have bothade good independant lives for themselves. and it was Captain Mark Phillip's choice to refuse a title when he married her. Same as her present husband,he had no title either. As for Prince Edward's children. He was made The Earl of Wessex when he married and him and Sophie( his wife) decided that any children of the marriage would be styled as the children of an Earl rather than with the royal titles that they would be eligible for under the 1917 letters patent (hereafter, LP17).
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 7, 2024 0:24:46 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 11:37:54 GMT
There was also a very strong element of " Just because you're Royal by an accident of birth it doesn't mean it's a free ride" attitude too. Princess Diana had that attitude with William and Harry too. She exposed them to far more ordinary people and ones that were less fortunate than they were when she was bringing them up and it shows, now that they have grown into adults themselves.
|
|