Order of Precedence

[Molly2101]

Originally Posted by Super Baroness

Seriously, that's the easiest way to see some sort of precedence! It's a bit fun to debate about the private precedence, but truthfully the public may never know that pecking order (and why should we? That's why it's private! Though I'm still confused why it was even released that the order was changed in 2005, it's not anyone outside the Royal Family's -or their close friends'- business)

It is the easiest way to see precedence that way! I think it's amusing that at these gatherings they all know exactly where to stand, who to stand behind and infront of and they wait their turn to get in line. It's amusing to see. They even know what side the women have to stand on when they are in procession. It's so formal!

Originally Posted by Super Baroness

Looking at the processions at Philip's 90th birthday service and Zara's wedding - you can see how it goes Queen/Philip, Charles/Camilla, and then William/Kate (sadly no more William/Harry). Before, after the Waleses came the Yorks, with Andrew flanked by his daughters. It's hard to tell, but I'm guessing that Harry walks with Andrew now, ahead of Beatrice and Eugenie. It will probably stay like that until either Royal man gets married (no idea how long til that happens!) or maybe even a York Princess..

I guess we'll see what happens at the Diamond Jubilee celebrations next year regarding where Harry stands, unless there are other formal family gatherings before then. I think Harry will probably walk with Andrew, followed by the princesses, then Edward and Sophie etc. If their children, or even Lady Louise who will be 8 then attends, would she walk in between them? Beatrice and Eugenie attended many formal gatherings when they were 8/9 and they flanked Andrew during the procession. I doubt Louise would go though, sadly.

Like you said, we can only speculate what they do in private.

[Lumutqueen]

Originally Posted by Midwestern Mom

Er...where does Prince Harry fit in?


MM

Prince Henry is 7th in the official order of precedence after HM, Philip, Charles, Andrew, Edward and William.

[branchg]

Originally Posted by Aliza

According to Debretts, Diana was considered the third lady in the land after her marriage, preceded only by HM and QEQM. One school of thought has it that HM revived the Princess Royal title in order to ensure that a Princess of the Blood was not outranked by one who "married in" and who by that time, was causing distress and considering leaving the RF.

Diana officially was the third lady in the kingdom after HM and The Queen Mother, as the wife of the heir to the throne. Camilla is the second lady in the land after HM.

At court, Diana's precedence varied depending on the year and The Queen's wishes, but generally was after HM, The Queen Mother, Princess Margaret and The Princess Royal, but before all other princesses of the blood and by marriage as the mother of the future King. After the divorce, Diana was granted her former precedence officially on state occasions and at court when present for royal occasions as the mother of Prince William.

The Duchess of Windsor was never listed in the Court Circular, except for her husband's funeral. She was not considered a member of the royal family as she was denied royal rank. When she died, she was granted some honours at her service, but that was about it.

[yvr girl]

This picture made me curious. Prince Andrew and, Duke of York Photos - Royal Wedding 2 - Zimbio

Harry and Beatrice and Eugenie are seated with their fathers but the Princess Royals children are after all the HRHs. At one time they sat with their mother. Are they placed further back now because they are married? Technically, they are higher in the line of succession and precedence as grandchildren of the Queen, but they are not official members of the Royal Family. What will happen when Beatrice and Eugenie get married? Where will they sit?

[Lumutqueen]

Originally Posted by yvr girl

but the Princess Royals children are after all the HRHs.

You may have typed wrong, but Zara and Peter are not HRHs.

Originally Posted by yvr girl

At one time they sat with their mother. Are they placed further back now because they are married? Technically, they are higher in the line of succession and precedence as grandchildren of the Queen, but they are not official members of the Royal Family. What will happen when Beatrice and Eugenie get married? Where will they sit?

Zara wasn't married when this picture was taken, but Peter was. I imagine they were sat back there because they don't have HRHs.

[branchg]

Originally Posted by yvr girl

This picture made me curious. Prince Andrew and, Duke of York Photos - Royal Wedding 2 - Zimbio

Harry and Beatrice and Eugenie are seated with their fathers but the Princess Royals children are after all the HRHs. At one time they sat with their mother. Are they placed further back now because they are married? Technically, they are higher in the line of succession and precedence as grandchildren of the Queen, but they are not official members of the Royal Family. What will happen when Beatrice and Eugenie get married? Where will they sit?

At court and officially, they would take precedence after the male-line grandchildren of The Queen who are HRH and closer in succession to the throne.

[Molly2101]

Originally Posted by branchg

At court and officially, they would take precedence after the male-line grandchildren of The Queen who are HRH and closer in succession to the throne.

So where do Louise and James fit in as they do not have HRH but their father is before Zara and Peter's mother?

[branchg]

Originally Posted by Molly2101

So where do Louise and James fit in as they do not have HRH but their father is before Zara and Peter's mother?

Legally, they remain HRH Prince James and HRH Princess Louise automatically under the 1917 Letters Patent as male-line grandchildren of The Queen, so they would take their precedence ahead of Peter and Zara Phillips.

However, The Queen announced on Edward's wedding day that his future children would not hold royal rank at the request of Edward and Sophie. As The Sovereign and fount of all honours, her announcement is sufficient to express her Will, which means Louise and James are not royal.

[yvr girl]

Originally Posted by branchg

At court and officially, they would take precedence after the male-line grandchildren of The Queen who are HRH and closer in succession to the throne.

But they were seated after grandchildren of George V (who are HRH)

[tihkon2]

Originally Posted by yvr girl
but the Princess Royals children are after all the HRHs.

You may have typed wrong, but Zara and Peter are not HRHs.

Lumutqueen

I think the original poster meant that they were seated after all the HRH's.

:-)

[branchg]

Originally Posted by yvr girl

But they were seated after grandchildren of George V (who are HRH)

William and Catherine's wedding was a royal, not a state, occasion. For formal events such as this, court precedence places all Royal Highnesses before non-royal members of the family.

[Molly2101]

Originally Posted by branchg

Legally, they remain HRH Prince James and HRH Princess Louise automatically under the 1917 Letters Patent as male-line grandchildren of The Queen, so they would take their precedence ahead of Peter and Zara Phillips.

However, The Queen announced on Edward's wedding day that his future children would not hold royal rank at the request of Edward and Sophie. As The Sovereign and fount of all honours, her announcement is sufficient to express her Will, which means Louise and James are not royal.

So we all know they do not use their HRH title, so do they sit before Peter and Zara as their father is before Anne in the order of precedence? I doubt we'll ever see both of them present at a formal or state occasion, at least not until the Queen's funeral perhaps, and that depends on how old James is at the time. But for the future, would they be seated before Peter and Zara? (On that note, what is even more scary is that way into the future at the funeral of the Catherine, The Queen Mother James will likely attend as James, Duke of Edinburgh and everyone will say that he is the youngest grandchild of Queen Elizabeth II. That is mad.)

Does this also mean if Lady Louise was to attend any Diamond Jubilee celebrations, would she walk with her parents or behind? The likelihood of her attending anything other than Trooping the Colour is slim, but if she were to attend something, she would not walk with her parents would she?

Also, when Charles is crowned will all his siblings and nieces and nephews attend as not all are HRH?

[branchg]

We'll have to see in the future when they are older and participate at royal and state occasions, but generally speaking, regardless of their style or title, they would take precedence ahead of Peter and Zara as male-line grandchildren of The Queen at court.

Once The Queen dies, anything could happen when Charles is King. He may issue Letters Patent limiting the HRH Prince/Princess style to the children of The Sovereign, the children of the heir to the throne and the eldest child of the eldest child of the heir. Everyone else would simply be Lord/Lady Windsor.

[Iluvbertie]

As the younger members become adult they take their own individual precedence. While they are younger they attend events with their parents so Lady Louise, and James, if he attends any Jubilee events (which I doubt) will attend with their parents - most likely Louise would walk directly with her parents either on the side of one or the other or in between them.

As for Harry - there are a couple of scenarios:

1. He still walks with William so that he, William and Kate enter as a threesome - highly doubtful but...
2. He walks on his own - probable.
3. He walks with Andrew followed by the girls - I doubt it - as I believe that the Wales boys virtually don't even talk to Andrew
4. He is accompanied by Beatrice while Eugenie accompanies Andrew (the girls could also go with the other male) - the advantage here is that they can then be male/female pairings.

When Charles marries of course his siblings, nieces and nephews will attend but most want have a formal procession although they will enter just before Charles - much the same way as happened at the Wedding where they were all in in reverse order of succession but also in family groups.

[NGalitzine]

"When Charles marries "........anticipating a 3rd marriage???

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by NGalitzine

"When Charles marries "........anticipating a 3rd marriage???

Ooops

I meant 'when Charles is crowned'.

Thanks for the heads up.

Have edited original post.