Protocol and Etiquette - Page 2

Josefine · #21 02-04-2006, 12:11 PM

i guess dress code depending on the event can be very important when meeting royals

Von Schlesian · #22 02-04-2006, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Josefine

i guess dress code depending on the event can be very important when meeting royals

Absolutely: Those who recieve invitations to Royal Events, or are hosting a Royal event themselves, recieve guidelines about what to wear. Evening dress is probably more limited in it's options, yet again though it totally depends on the event. At highland balls, highland or military dress is usually prescribed for gentlemen, during day-time events (depending on the time of year), a lighter or darker suit would be prescribed for gentlemen, I am not so well informed about ladies, but hats certainly come into play then.

**Marengo** · #23 02-04-2006, 08:46 PM

In the Netherlands most of these rules are already abolished. Only after WWII a courtier had the nerves to tell Queen Wilhelmina that the rule that when she is done with her dinner everybody else should stop as well, caused the guests to go home with an empty stomach (restaurants near the palace were usually filled after a royal banquet). Juliana abolished the curtseying and the walking backwards in a room sas she was afraid somebody would fall and embarrased if old people had to bow.

However some things didnt change. Somebody once started speaking to Queen Wilhelmina, the Queen gave an icely told her lady-in-waiting to inform that person that when in presence of a queen one is not expected to talk first (probably she didn't like the person who spoke as she was usually very courteous in situations like this. Once Paul Kruger attended a banquet at the palace and he mistook the bowl in which you can clean your greasy hands for something to drink from. After the Queen notced that Kruger drank from the bowl she did the same, in rder not to emberras him).

BeatrixFan · #24 02-05-2006, 09:07 AM

In Britain, I think the rule still stands that everyone stops eating when the Queen does at smaller dinners but for state banquets, it's been dropped. The Queen is always "Your Majesty" and others are "Your Royal Highness". You never touch a member of the Royal Family unless you're a close acquaintance and have their permission to kiss them etc, you never address them as 'you'. So for example, you say, "Did Your Majesty enjoy the performance?" and not "Did you like it?".

Dress is Britain is extremely complicated and depends on the event. We have morning dress and evening dress and we have rules on what colours to wear and when etc. All very complicated and I'd recommend 'Debretts Guide to Etiquette and Modern Manners' which comes out every 3 or 4 years and is updated. Very handy.

Alexandria · #25 02-05-2006, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan

You never touch a member of the Royal Family unless you're a close acquaintance

Despite the more formal attitude she gives off, I think the Queen may be a bit more flexible on certain matters of protocol. A few years ago, when she was in Canada during her jubilee year, she was in Montreal and a famous cyclist went up to her and asked for a picture with her, which the Queen obliged. He then put his arm around her shoulders while his wife took the picture.

My memory is fuzzy, but at some point, either when the cyclist approached her or when he put his arms around her, one of the queen's ladies in waiting made a move to ask the man to not do that, but it was the queen who told her lady in waiting that it was okay and allowed the photo op to go on.

The picture of the cyclist and queen made it to the front pages of many newspapers here in Canada.

BeatrixFan · #26 02-05-2006, 11:07 AM

I remember seeing that. And then there was the woman in Africa who threw her arms around her and the Queen gave her a little cuddle back. But Margaret Thatcher was always touching the Queen's arm as if to lead her on which was always seen as a ghastly thing to do and I have to agree. Charles has said that he doesn't like people throwing their arms around him and he says that Americans have no idea when it comes to titles. "I'd rather they called me Charles if they can't manage HRH". Joan Rivers once said that she had no idea how to cope with titles and when she called, "Queenie, Duke and Prince", three dogs came along.

Australian · #27 02-05-2006, 11:08 AM

There was an incident when the then Prime Minister Paul Keating of Australia caused an uproar when he touched the Queen's back as a gesture to walk in a certain direction. There were many cartoons about this incident in papers and the Queen wasnt very happy!

BeatrixFan · #28 02-05-2006, 11:11 AM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2332003.stm

The Cyclist Story and Photo from the BBC.

When Princess Michael of Kent took her children to see Les Dawson in a pantomime, he asked her if she'd come on stage. She did so and they had a great laugh together whilst she danced with him (As Widow Twankey) and generally enjoyed herself.

**Warren** · #29 02-05-2006, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Australian

There was an incident when the then Prime Minister Paul Keating of Australia caused an uproar when he touched the Queen's back as a gesture to walk in a certain direction. There were many cartoons about this incident in papers and the Queen wasnt very happy!

It was a London tabloid-driven "uproar". Keating touched her back to guide her as he was introducing her to various people.
There was no suggestion from the Palace that the Queen was in any way "offended".
Just another storm in a teacup with a political agenda.

ps.. ref the second photo in BeatrixFan's BBC link (post above): the caption is confusing and does not show the former Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating.

BeatrixFan · #30 02-05-2006, 11:22 AM

I think that because the Queen is an older lady that the majority have a great deal of affection for, people become protective and want to help her and put their arm around her in a loving and caring sort of way.

susan alicia · #31 02-05-2006, 01:51 PM

I have heard that story re the finger bowl about victoria and an indian guest.

Re wilhelmina, someone told me that she merrily farted at soestdijk when she received dignitaries.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marengo

In the Netherlands most of these rules are already abolished. Only after WWII a courtier had the nerves to tell Queen Wilhelmina that the rule that when she is done with her dinner everybody else should stop as well, caused the guests to go home with an empty stomach (restaurants near the palace were usually filled after a royal banquet). Juliana abolished the curtseying and the walking backwards in a room sas she was afraid somebody would fall and embarrased if old people had to bow.

However some things didnt change. Somebody once started speaking to Queen Wilhelmina, the Queen gave an icely told her lady-in-waiting to inform that person that when in presence of a queen one is not expected to talk first (probably she didn't like the person who spoke as she was usually very courteous in situations like this. Once Paul Kruger attended a banquet at the palace and he mistook the bowl in which you can clean your greasy hands for something to drink from. After the Queen notced that Kruger drank from the bowl she did the same, in rder not to emberras him).

RoyalProtocol · #32 02-24-2006, 07:35 AM

Replying to Royal Invitations, if one recieves an invitation from HM The Queen you should respond to it as a Royal Command rather than and Invitation using the formula below:

(Your Name In Full) presents his/their compliments to The (member of the houshold who sent the comand) and has the honour to obey Her Majesty's command to attend (details of the event)

For Example:

The Right Honourable The Prime Minister presents his compliments to the Lord Stewart and has the honour to obey Her Majesty's command to attend the State Banquet in Honour of the Visit of His Excellency The President of Chili on Thursday the Second of September 2005 at seven o'clock.

Princess BellyFlop · #33 02-24-2006, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warren

It was a London tabloid-driven "uproar". Keating touched her back to guide her as he was introducing her to various people.
There was no suggestion from the Palace that the Queen was in any way "offended".
Just another storm in a teacup with a political agenda.

ps.. ref the photo in BeatrixFan's BBC link (post under): the man with his arm around the Queen is not the former Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating.

The man is Louis Garneau, the former cyclist and now a successful businessman and designer of sports wear. He's from Quebec City. He's a caring family man with beautiful values.

The incident took place in Ottawa (Onario) - as the Queen NO LONGER comes anywhere in the province of Quebec after some threatening incidents in the 50s or early 60s and also because of the *&?$()?"!!!!! separatist movement in that province. I can use this languague because I live in that province and I am stuck with that political group BEURK.

As a Quebecer, especially a French-speaking one, it took Garneau lots of courage to show his respect to her Majesty. You can guess that being a monarchist is a big no-no in my province. He took a lot of blame for that after the picture was shown. He remained very respectful of her Majesty saying he was very sorry he broke the protocol and explaining that when the picture was taken he just leaned toward her as she was so nice, just like you would do with your grandma or a lovely grand-aunt.

AdmiralSteven · #34 10-13-2006, 10:08 AM

I'm not sure how to ask this question in an proper way, and thus the reason I didn't do a search (I wasn't sure on how to word the search). So, if this is a question that has been asked, or answered in another thread then I apologize now.

Are former ruling familes, such as the Romonov's, Bourbon's, or any former royal ruling familes, ever given any special treatment? I'm not talking special treatment on taxes or speeding tickets, but in attending state functions, or how they are addressed by members of state? I came across a picture (sorry, I can't find it now) of the funeral of Henri, Comte de Paris, and I got to wondering if anyone from the government would have attended on an "official" basis. Am I making sense? I hope so. Thanks, AdmiralSteven

FarahJoy · #35 07-27-2007, 06:16 AM

It is interesting to see in the medias that some Royal persons are quite rigid with the protocole and seem to appreciate being addressed to and treated like a king, a queen, a prince or a princess with all of the advantages linked to their title...

...while some of them, instead, try to escape from it as often as they can and to have what they think is a "normal life" : they send their boyguards to hell, go shopping "incognito" in the next supermarket, like to chat with people on a bench in a park, walk their dog all alone in the bush, push a baby carriage without the help of any servant.

So I was wondering how each of your favorite Royal appreciates either one or the other type of condition

carlota · #36 07-27-2007, 07:17 AM

i think most of them like a combination of both postures. while they like being addressed properly (some royals actually demanded people to refer to them as "your royal highness") and all the pomp and circumstance of royal protocol, some others are more laid back and participate in activities that some other royals wouldn't. some prefer a bit of both, depending on the circumstance. i guess it depends on how known you are, what role you have in the family and your age and previous position as commoner or royal by blood.

**LadyK** · #37 07-27-2007, 08:40 AM

one story I think fits was when Prince Charles and Prince William went to school (particularly secondary school). Prince Charles always wanted to be addressed as "Your Royal Highness," particularly by teachers, but William just wanted to be addressed only as "William Wales"

**Marengo** · #38 07-27-2007, 10:24 AM

The late Queen Juliana dispised protocol. There was a notorious television interview in the 80-ties with Juliana and Bernhard and when Juliana was asked about protocol she became very angry. Talking about how people were mean and used protocol as an excuse to prohibit her from doing things. SHe especially referred to an incident from her youth, when a courtier prohibited her from doing something with protocol and her mother, Queen Wilhelmina as an excuse.

Juliana was still angry about that 70 years later and raised her voice and said that she was absolutely certain that her mother would allow it, as she wanted her daughter to make fun. In the end Juliana was so angry that she was banging her fist on the table. She explained that there isn't such a thing as protocol, it simply doesn't exsist. Prince Bernhard in the mean time was smoking his pipe and clearly enjoyed his wife's tantrum, with the usual sparkle in his eyes he just had to smile.

norwegianne · #39 09-16-2007, 02:43 PM

They would have to ask permission in both countries, the order in which this would be done doesn't seem to be set. It would also depend on if there was a requirement to gain the sovereign's consent on the marriage and not, I think.

Given that Frederick is above the age of 25, he wouldn't have to have the Queen's permission, but if he didn't ask for it, he would have to give notice to the Privy council and then wait 12 calendar months to marry. From what I've gathered from the Royal Marriages act of 1772, anyway. I'm not sure how this would fit into the Act of Settlement from 1701, though?

I suppose as Madeleine is currently 3rd in line in Sweden and Frederick 31st in the UK, as well as the last person in line, it would be more likely to appeal to her father to ask the cabinet for permission for her to wed.