General Chat

Who? :-(

:-D :-D :-D

Allan, there has been plenty of press coverage for Princess Anne's daughter Zara, her marriage to Mike Tindall, about her children's births and her miscarriage etc

Lizx

PSD, that may be the case in the UK but not over here, and Zara's brother may well as not exist at all.

Yes that's true, we've heard/hear plenty about Zara's family, new baby, little girl etc, pics of Princess Anne with Prince Phillip on his birthday. Plenty of royal news in the UK about all of them!!! If my Australian cousins and particularly their children are anything to go by, they're just not interested in the RF, so I expect the Australian press reflects this opinion.

Zara Tindall is a British sportswoman, & did win an equestrian silver medal in the 2012 Olympics. Her husband, Mike, has played Rugby at international level. His name was linked to unacceptable behaviour during the 2011 RU World Cup in NZ.
With a combination of sportsmanship & Royal Family, it’s no wonder the tabloids love to publish articles about them.
I seem to recall some Scottish people complained about the expense of security at their Edinburgh wedding.

Reading the wiki article about her brother, Peter, it seems that his jobs revolve around sponsorship & corporate hospitality. No doubt he’s been able to utilise his ‘society’ & sports connections.

One of the York girls has been spotted in the background, accompanying the Queen on some of her engagements. May be this is in return for an allowance either from the Queen or the Civil List?

Off topic, but Magpie's post has just reminded me of something :-)

I know that in her younger days Princess Anne was notorious for her alleged foul language and refusal to conform to 'normal' Royal behaviour, no doubt a trait shared with her Aunt.

I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when there was an argument between Princess Anne and her dad ;-) :-D :-D

Why?!! :-S :-S

Because! :-P :-D

Allan good morning afterevening……

The offspring of princesses aren't given prince/ss titles - not royal enough presumably :-S I imagine if Anne had been offered alternative titles for her children she would have said 'naff orff' :-D :-D

Island, good evening here, good morning in the UK :-)

I believe that Mark Phillips was offered a Title so that his children would be entitled, as it were, to be known as whatever, but that he refused.

As far as I can gather his son, Peter, was the first child born into the Royal Family in over five hundred years not to receive an Honorific on his birth ;-) :-D :-D

They don't want no riff raff you know. Got to have a title!

I would hope they will address this blatant sexism now that princess junior has been elevated in line to the throne over her younger brother.
Not that I give a poop but some things just irk. :-|

:-D :-D :-D

Island, I totally agree

The Divine Right of Kings and now Queens! And there have been some screaming queens amongst the Kings over the centuries ;-) :-D

*nods in agreement* mmm.... ;-) :-D

:-D :-D :-D

Who were they? Maybe poor Catherine Howard, and Caroline of Brunswick, but I can't think of any others?_

The divine right of those who thought they were kings, is what it ought to be.

It would have been far more secure to have gone down the female line from the year dot for who knows for sure that the baby born to a couple is the offspring of the father? :-S

Bit late for that now!!! I don't think many of our Kings wives had even a whiff of scandal about them!! Queen Caroline did, but Princess Charlotte was born nine months after Carolines's marriage to Prinny, so her credentials were pretty secure!

Course it's a bit late now, Magpie, but I was pointing out that it ought to have been the divine right of queens!

The divine right of Kings meant that they were there by the will of God and were only answerable to him. It applied to Queens as well. Mary 1st, Elizabeth 1st but not later Queens as it had ceased to apply by the time of Queen Anne.