Order of Precedence

[Iluvbertie]

There have been reports for nearly 30 years that Anne has refused to curtsey first to Diana and now to Camilla - now after their marriages Diana and Camilla were/are also HRHs as is Anne but she has simply refused to curtsey to them.

That is a clear indication that they do curtsey/bow to each other, even in private.

If you think about it - if they don't observe the differences between themselves there really is no point in having them as there is no need for anyone else to do say.

[NGalitzine]

In one of Robert Golden's articles at the back of Majest magazine he mentions a newly married into member of the royal family complaining that another member of the royal family not curtseying to her and the comment from her husband was "of course not, she is family".

[miche]

During the Thames Pageant the only people that all the HRH curtsy and bow to was The Queen and Prince Philip

[Iluvbertie]

We must remember that they also see each other before these events begin in many cases so the curtseying is done in private not public.

Of course when the Queen is present then everyone curtseys/bows to her so they don't then curtsey to others lower in the pecking order.

[NGalitzine]

I don't think the Monarchs lunch is much of a guide since many of the guests were curtseying to people they clearly did not have to. Perhaps because such gatherings are so rare, especially in the UK, people just started bobbing and nodding to everyone they met.

I still believe that the Order of Precedence is used for the purpose of seating plans and order of entry to state occassions. I find it very hard to believe that HRHs would have to curtsey to each other privately or even at official events. Prince Philip being the exception due to his position as consort and also his great age and the respect he is held in.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by NGalitzine

I still believe that the Order of Precedence is used for the purpose of seating plans and order of entry to state occassions. I find it very hard to believe that HRHs would have to curtsey to each other privately or even at official events. Prince Philip being the exception due to his position as consort and also his great age and the respect he is held in.

IIRC, private occasions would be formal dinners at Balmoral where everything is perfectly timed with all the royals entering the dining room by the order of precedence. Another such occasion would be the Ghillies' Ball that the Queen hosts every year at Balmoral. I would think that during formal private occasions, strict protocol would be followed but perhaps not so much at one of Philip's famous BBQ's.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by NGalitzine

In one of Robert Golden's articles at the back of Majest magazine he mentions a newly married into member of the royal family complaining that another member of the royal family not curtseying to her and the comment from her husband was "of course not, she is family".

To be honest, I can't for the life of me think of who the newly married member of the royal family could possibly be. It really doesn't strike me as Kate's nature to be bothered by a non-curtsey in the least. When an article alludes to "someone", the chances are very likely that the story is fictional.

[PrincePat10]

I wanted to get some input on whether The duchess of Cambridge truly must curtsy to William's cousins in private.

I'm aware that The Duchess is not a princess of the blood or a princess in her own right, but she technically is "Princess" William of of Wales, the wife of the The UK's future King.

However, I guess since the current Monarch writes the order of Precedence there I'd only do much that can be said.

I always admired Her Majesty the Queen since I was 12 years old for her decorum. I hope this is not as it seems.

[dbarn67]

I have no problem with the Order of Precedence that Her Majesty has set forth. Just because the Duchess of Cambridge is the popular gal of the moment doesn't mean she should leapfrog over the Queen's rules. I, for one, think it's right that blood princesses have a slight advantage over someone who's married into the role of princesses. I have enormous respect for Princess Anne, and, as she's a blood princess I think she should have a higher advantage of the Camilla, Sophie and now Catherine. Beatrice and Eugenie shouldn't be subject to a different set of standard just because they're not a popular as Catherine or as active in the royal work world as the Princess Royal.

[Tsar bobo Iv]

but she is the mother to the future heir to the throne

[Meraude]

Originally Posted by Tsar bobo Iv

but she is the mother to the future heir to the throne

So was the late Diana, princess of Wales, and she also had to follow the Order of Precedence and as far as I know there were no complaints that Diana had to curtsey to the princesses of the blood.

[auntie]

Originally Posted by dbarn67

I have no problem with the Order of Precedence that Her Majesty has set forth. Just because the Duchess of Cambridge is the popular gal of the moment doesn't mean she should leapfrog over the Queen's rules. I, for one, think it's right that blood princesses have a slight advantage over someone who's married into the role of princesses. I have enormous respect for Princess Anne, and, as she's a blood princess I think she should have a higher advantage of the Camilla, Sophie and now Catherine. Beatrice and Eugenie shouldn't be subject to a different set of standard just because they're not a popular as Catherine or as active in the royal work world as the Princess Royal.

Yes I see your point, but there is a difference being that Anne is the daughter of the reigning monarch, whilst the York princesses are granddaughters. And kate is married to the future heir, son of the oldest son, whilst they are daughters of the third child of the quee. I do see a point in children of the monarch having precedence over grandchildren of the monarch on some occasions. But if they are both grandchildren I don't understand it. I have a feeling there is more than meets the eye.

[dbarn67]

There may be more to the Order that we'll ever know but I still think it's totally appropriate for Bea and Eug to come before Sophie and Catherine. Catherine came into the marriage as a commoner with not aristocratic or royal title of her own. Yes, she's pretty and popular but she's shouldn't come in with nothing to recommend her but her marriage to Williams. She should, in my opinion, take a step back before the blood princesses. Unfortunately, as we saw with Sarah and Diana and even Anne's 1st husband, royal marriages are not always secure forever. It is right that Catherine and Camilla be a step removed from have full royal precedence to Bea, Anne and Eugenie IMO. The Order of Precedence will change as time moves forward. When Charles becomes King the order may change to Catherine outranking Beatrice and Eugenie. JMO.

[casualfan]

It's all a question of perception, isn't it?

One material point is that royalty must adapt to the times in order to survive, just like any other cultural or governmental institution.

The fact is, the idea of "blood princesses" sounds ridiculously medieval. To many, it sounds incredibly classist and elitist to believe that someone of particular birth "deserves" privileges.

I'm not convinced that that is the idea that QEII wants to project, given that she puts so much public emphasis on service and duty.

[COESpiral]

I can see curtseying to Anne as she is The Princess Royal, but Beatrice and Eugenie strikes me as a little odd. I mean, if she's going to have to curtsey to blood relatives won't that also mean Louise and James? And what about the also-royal-but-untitled Peter and Zara? It's a wonder Catherine doesn't get migraines trying to keep it all straight. It seems like such a maze!

[Lumutqueen]

Louise and James are too young, and Zara and Peter are not titled and are not classed as "royal" they are just related to the royal family. They don't really come into consideration. Also, just because Anne has the title Princess Royal makes her no more deserving of a curtsey than her nieces IMO.

This discussion has been talked about in 3 different threads, and I believe the same conclusion has arisen. We don't know who curtsey's to who in private, it's private. IMO curtsey's come down to respect for one another.

[Molly2101]

Catherine would never have to curtsey to Louise or James, unless they choose to use their HRH title which I doubt they ever will do. Nor will she curtsey to Peter or Zara as they are not HRH/"Royal".

This curtseying thing is all rubbish, and I highly doubt they actually curtsey to one another except for the Queen and Prince Philip. I can honestly say I have NEVER come across an image of Sophie ever curtseying to Camilla or Anne, never mind Beatrice and Eugenie. If this is the way it is going to, Sophie will end up curtseying to her own daughter. I think this precedence thing is only for when it is only female's attending an engagement, which is very rare.

I just cannot imagine the family sitting down for a gathering and worrying about to whom they have to bend a knee too. The only reason the Queen changed the Precedence when Camilla married Charles was because she did not want to have to see Alexandra or Anne curtsey to her son's new wife. She did not change it when Sophie married, thus she did not have a problem with the idea of Sophie coming before her daugther, therefore it makes me think the Queen changed it on purpose because of her earlier dislike of Camilla.

[Artemisia]

I'd just like to add three things (all extensively covered in the Precedence thread).

Firstly, there is a difference between Official and Private Orders of Precedence.
In the Official order, blood Princesses do NOT outrank Princesses by marriage. Thus, the Duchess of Cornwall (as wife of the Duke of Cornwall) comes immediately after the Queen, followed by the Countess of Wessex (wife of the younger son of the Sovereign), followed by the Duchess of Cambridge (wife of the son of the Prince of Wales).
In Private order, which is entirely at will of the Sovereign, blood Princesses such as Princess Anne, Princess Alexandra, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie (possibly, Lady Louise too) do outrank Princesses by marriage.

Secondly, Precedence list does NOT indicate who has to curtsey to whom; it just shows who has precedence over whom. A subtle difference, but still.
A century or even a couple of decades ago (when protocol, precedence and ranking rules were far stricter than now), the place in the precedence list might have meant those lower in the list had to curtsey those above them. Both Precedence lists are there simply for convenience, to settle questions such as arrival order and sitting arrangements.
Private Precedence list is only relevant for private events - and I strongly doubt royal ladies go about curtseying to each other during those. Again, it is mostly for more practical arrangements, not curtseying or bowing.

Thirdly, even if the strictest protocol rules are operated (such as for Coronations), despite the common misconception, Kate still wouldn't curtsey to blood Princesses.
Royal ladies would have to curtsey only to those above them in the Official Precedence Order - NOT the private one. Thus, Kate would have to curtsey only to those above her - the Queen, the Duchess of Cornwall, and the Countess of Wessex. Similarly, Camilla would have to curtsey only to the Queen - and no one else, whether Princess by blood or marriage.

[dbarn67]

Ultimately I have enough respect for Her Majesty's judgement that I don't really question her and her staff's Order of Precedence public or private. It's really a non-issue IMO.

[kbk]

It's really pointless to have the same discussion over and over again. One more time I direct you to already existing and well-advanced thread titled Order of Precedence. Everyone is welcome. Just don't start a new thread because you want to make your point or ask some questions.
IMO, all that noise about "Kate curtsying to Beatrice and Eugenie" is strictly a matter of protocl and Order of Precedence. And just because some *****y tabloids had what to yell about for some days does not mean there was real "contrvoversy".
Artemisia, I admire your patience. You just keep explaining the facts to us, ignorants, again and again. I'm sure you ca use the cut, copy, and paste command sometimes. ;-)