The Phillips Children and Titles - Page 2

diamondBrg · #21 01-10-2008, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blondie28

Anne's children have a great deal more privacy than any of there cousins (with the exception of Louise and James). First of all they do not have any bodyguards and ladies in waiting to follow their every move. Secondly they don't have a title but they attend most royal functions with other members of the family. Peter and Zara both live in cottages on Gatcombe with their "partners" and cook their own meals get in their own hot tub and can visit a princess just a few yards away. Unfortunately they do have to deal with the papparazzi just because they are the Queen's grandchildren and people will always be interested. I think they would say their life is pretty good.

You said they attend most royal functions, are they required to, is it expected or are they free to decline?

Since they are without titles, could they say simple "I am not interested in any of this, I want to live a private life, please leave me alone?" Would HM Queen Elizabeth be OK with that in your opinion? How about their mother, Princess Anne?

Once their grandmother goes to her reward, in your opinion will their privacy be enhanced?

diamondBrg · #22 01-10-2008, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elspeth

I think their degree of privacy is potentially greater. Zara has a higher profile because of her competitive riding and because she's photogenic, but Peter Phillips is usually out of the headlines and left alone to live his life in a way that his HRH cousins aren't. I don't think it's just that he lives a quieter life; I have a feeling that William, Harry, Beatrice, and Eugenie would be in the news more than he is even if they were as low-key about their private lives.

We crossposted, thanks for the info though.

blondie28 · #23 01-10-2008, 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diamondBrg

You said they attend most royal functions, are they required to, is it expected or are they free to decline?

Since they are without titles, could they say simple "I am not interested in any of this, I want to live a private life, please leave me alone?" Would HM Queen Elizabeth be OK with that in your opinion? How about their mother, Princess Anne?

Once their grandmother goes to her reward, in your opinion will their privacy be enhanced?

Well I'm sure they are required to, unless there is a major reason for them to not attend. they are probably like any other family they enjoy all the chances they can get together. If they told their grandmother "I want a private life, I don't wan't any of this" than I don't think their wishes would be met. As they get older they will probably drift farther fro the spotlight and won't have to attend as many functions.
When William is king they will simply be known as the king's cousin. Sort of like the Kents. Zara has made a place for her in society and will not die unknown.

diamondBrg · #24 01-10-2008, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blondie28

Well I'm sure they are required to, unless there is a major reason for them to not attend. they are probably like any other family they enjoy all the chances they can get together. If they told their grandmother "I want a private life, I don't wan't any of this" than I don't think their wishes would be met. As they get older they will probably drift farther fro the spotlight and won't have to attend as many functions.
When William is king they will simply be known as the king's cousin. Sort of like the Kents. Zara has made a place for her in society and will not die unknown.

A straight forward question here, IF Zara and Peter simply REFUSED, in a practical sense what would happen? How can they be compelled to do anything? Since they are not titled, what could be the possible repercussions? I understand that it is highly likely that they would NOT be the recipients of any benefits from a Will from HM Queen Elizabeth or their mother, but short of that? They receive NO money from the Royal Family, correct?

zembla · #25 01-10-2008, 05:51 PM

Well even if they had titles...they would never be a prince or a princess. They would always have a large degree of privacy and normalcy to their lives...pap attention yes...but still not as bad as their more high profile cousins.

It could also be said that their cousins have a higher profile not just because of titles but because they frequent areas around London that are prime for media attention. Peter and Zara tend to stay away from that scene...

diamondBrg · #26 01-10-2008, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zembla

Well even if they had titles...they would never be a prince or a princess. They would always have a large degree of privacy and normalcy to their lives...pap attention yes...but still not as bad as their more high profile cousins.

It could also be said that their cousins have a higher profile not just because of titles but because they frequent areas around London that are prime for media attention. Peter and Zara tend to stay away from that scene...

Well that is something else that puzzles me. Their mother is a child of the sitting Monarch. WHY were they not a Prince and Princess, like their cousins? Because of their mother's gender?

blondie28 · #27 01-10-2008, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diamondBrg

A straight forward question here, IF Zara and Peter simply REFUSED, in a practical sense what would happen? How can they be compelled to do anything? Since they are not titled, what could be the possible repercussions? I understand that it is highly likely that they would NOT be the recipients of any benefits from a Will from HM Queen Elizabeth or their mother, but short of that? They receive NO money from the Royal Family, correct?

If they simply refused then they would be left alone with having nothing to do with the royals. They can have any job they like they do not have any duties to carry out, they would make their own money, although they do not have to pay anything for living on Gatcombe. The Queen would be upset if they decided they didn't want anything to do with the family, but I don't think mad enough to leave them out of her will. They don't receive money from the royal family, if anything they are "lended money".

diamondBrg · #28 01-10-2008, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blondie28

If they simply refused then they would be left alone with having nothing to do with the royals. They can have any job they like they do not have any duties to carry out, they would make their own money, although they do not have to pay anything for living on Gatcombe. The Queen would be upset if they decided they didn't want anything to do with the family, but I don't think mad enough to leave them out of her will. They don't receive money from the royal family, if anything they are "lended money".

OK and THANK YOU for taking the time to answer my questions, I do appreciate it.

I guess where I come from is that they were deprived of the MAJOR benefit of being a Royal and that is being Titled, for whatever reasons that might have been the case. I just don't think with that being the case, there should be any expectations of them, other than ordinary family ones.

blondie28 · #29 01-10-2008, 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diamondBrg

OK and THANK YOU for taking the time to answer my questions, I do appreciate it.

No problem. That's why I'm here.

**Elspeth** · #30 01-10-2008, 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diamondBrg

Well that is something else that puzzles me. Their mother is a child of the sitting Monarch. WHY were they not a Prince and Princess, like their cousins? Because of their mother's gender?

Short answer: Yes.

Long answer: Royal Styles and Titles of Great Britain

**Elspeth** · #31 01-10-2008, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diamondBrg

OK and THANK YOU for taking the time to answer my questions, I do appreciate it.

I guess where I come from is that they were deprived of the MAJOR benefit of being a Royal and that is being Titled, for whatever reasons that might have been the case. I just don't think with that being the case, there should be any expectations of them, other than ordinary family ones.

There aren't, really. You don't see either of them doing the sort of royal duties that the Queen and her children and cousins do - visiting worthy causes, opening schools and hospitals, planting trees, heading up charities, going on official overseas visits. They do tend to turn up to family occasions like the Jubilees and the services of thanksgiving for jubilees and wedding anniversaries and so on, which count as ordinary family outings for that particular family even if they look very much like state affairs to us.

Yes, they could refuse to go to Granny's Jubilee bash or the Christmas service at Sandringham, but I assume they know that they'd be asking for the tabloids to pounce.

diamondBrg · #32 01-10-2008, 10:46 PM

Once again, THANK YOU ELSPETH for all the great information.

My understanding is much clearer now.

I am surprised that modern day British women tolerate the difference between the treatment of the genders in the Royal family.

I hope I don't say this wrong, but a WOMAN is good enough to be the QUEEN OF THE UNITED KINGDOM in her OWN RIGHT, yet her daughter's children don't qualify to be a Prince and Princess? Strange to say the least.

Skydragon · #33 01-11-2008, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diamondBrg

I am surprised that modern day British women tolerate the difference between the treatment of the genders in the Royal family.

It happens within the majority of the titled families, as they are brought up to know that their brothers get the main benefits, it rarely causes a problem. I would imagine not having any title has brought them both many plus points. They are not expected to become involved in anything they don't want to. They may have missed out on some of the perks, but what price relative privacy and freedom?

lyndaW · #34 01-11-2008, 04:42 PM

Personally I think Princess Anne should have let them be "Titled" when they were born, and then when they reached age 21 it could and should have been their decision if they wished to keep the title. I just don't think it was fair of Anne to make that decision.....its obviously a moot point at this late date

Rebafan81 · #35 01-11-2008, 05:01 PM

Could the Queen offer a title to Peter on his marriage, like a lot of the other royal houses, including Britian, have done in the past?

**Elspeth** · #36 01-12-2008, 01:23 AM

She could, but considering how the Earl of Wessex's children aren't being styled as HRH even though they're entitled to it, granting a title to Peter Philips would be going in the opposite direction from the one the royal family seems to be going in. I think it'd be highly unlikely that the Queen would offer him a title.

HRH Kimetha · #37 03-22-2008, 06:43 PM

So, as I understand the post above, neither Peter or Zara receive any 'income' from Princess Anne? I ask because Prince Charles seems to be responsible for Princes William & Harry monetarily even with them drawing money from their army stints. Does the Queen still give Anne any 'allowance'?

branchg · #38 04-27-2008, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HRH Kimetha

So, as I understand the post above, neither Peter or Zara receive any 'income' from Princess Anne? I ask because Prince Charles seems to be responsible for Princes William & Harry monetarily even with them drawing money from their army stints. Does the Queen still give Anne any 'allowance'?

Peter and Zara receive income from trust funds set-up by The Queen for her grandchildren (with the exception of William and Harry). William and Harry receive money from their mother's inheritance, their father and, in Harry's case, money he received from The Earl Spencer and The Queen Mother.

Anne also receives money from a trust fund as well as monies from The Queen for her public duties.