The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #801  
Old 10-02-2012, 12:18 PM
Catherine J's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Halifax, Canada
Posts: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meraude View Post
I doubt that the children of Edward and Sophie will be a part of the royal entourage, their role in the future will be similar to Peter and Zarah Phillips and David and Sarah Armstrong-Jones, their parents will continue represent the BRF but the children will only attend family events.
Yes, that makes sense.

It must be difficult, as each reign begins the shift to accommodate the next, to determine which members will be "working" royals and which ones will have to get to the other kind of working.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #802  
Old 10-03-2012, 01:38 AM
Queen Camilla's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 663
When Princess Anne became Princess Royal didn't that move up Zara?
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #803  
Old 10-03-2012, 02:17 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,152
In the official order, daughters of the sovereign come fourth not second.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #804  
Old 10-03-2012, 02:21 AM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 2,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke-of-Earl View Post
Kate Middleton, the Queen and Duchess of Cornwall on official visit to Fortnum & Mason | Mail Online

Quote from this article "
They are the three most senior female royals in the land.
But as the Queen, the Duchess of Cornwall and the Duchess of Cambridge popped out for spot of tea yesterday, it was as if they were on a girls’ day out."


So is Catherine the third senior Lady in the land, or not??
I wouldn't pay much attention to that article. I stopped reading it after I read, "The Queen, who celebrated her Diamond Jubilee this year, looked simply delighted to be accompanied for the first time by the two women who will, one day, follow in her footsteps." Leaving aside the issue that Camilla may not be known as Queen, neither of those women will ever follow in her Majesty's footsteps, since they will be Queens Consort, not Regnant.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #805  
Old 10-03-2012, 11:30 AM
Duchessmary's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: San Diego, United States
Posts: 1,087
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Camilla View Post
When Princess Anne became Princess Royal didn't that move up Zara?
No. The children of Princess Anne (or Princess Royal) do not have titles because Anne and her husband did not want them.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #806  
Old 10-03-2012, 11:42 AM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Camilla View Post
When Princess Anne became Princess Royal didn't that move up Zara?
Princess Royal is a title that is traditionally (but not always) bestowed upon the eldest surviving daughter of a Monarch.
It doesn't affect the precedence or ranking of the bearer of the title, or her issue.

Precedence among those who are equal (for instance, granddaughters of the Monarch) is determined by primogeniture. Thus, Zara (who, as a daughter of the daughter comes last by primogeniture rules) is behind all of her cousins - Beatrice, Eugenie and Louise.
Reply With Quote
  #807  
Old 10-03-2012, 11:57 AM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke-of-Earl View Post
What about this article. Catherine's appears to very high in the pecking order,
The article just repeats what has been said on numerous previous occasions - and most of it turned out to be incorrect.
Firstly, there is a great difference between Official and Private Precedence lists.
In the Official Precedence List, Kate - as wife of the Sovereign's grandson - comes fifth (after the Queen, Camilla, Sophie and Anne).
In the Private Precedence List, which is entire at the Sovereign's will, Kate - as British Princess by marriage - comes (after the Queen, Anne, Beatrice, Eugenie, Lady Louise, Princess Alexandra, Camilla and Sophie).

Woman to woman, Kate is outranked only by the Queen, Camilla, Sophie and Anne. Camilla and Sophie also outrank Kate through their husbands (so if Charles, Edward and William are all present, then Kate's precedence is unchanged).

It has to be noted, however, that what with the emphasis on the "core" members of the Royal Family (the Wales family plus the Queen and Prince Philip), Kate appears to have been given a somewhat higher (unofficial) precedence, coming immediately after the Queen and Camilla, and ahead of Sophie and Princess Anne.
Reply With Quote
  #808  
Old 10-03-2012, 12:41 PM
Dman's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 7,005
I think The Queen and the Palace made it pretty clear doing the Jubilee celebrations that Catherine's precedence within the "Firm" is above The Princess Royal, Countess of Wessex, etc.

I think the focus is now on the "core" senior members of the royal family.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #809  
Old 10-03-2012, 02:09 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,152
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
I think The Queen and the Palace made it pretty clear doing the Jubilee celebrations that Catherine's precedence within the "Firm" is above The Princess Royal, Countess of Wessex, etc.

I think the focus is now on the "core" senior members of the royal family.
I don't think they did that in anyway. The balcony appearance and the carriage ride showed the 'future' of the monarchy. It in no way showed that Catherine outranks Camilla, Anne and Sophie. Both sets of precedence, one determined by The Queen herself lists Catherine below Camilla, Sophie and Anne.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #810  
Old 10-03-2012, 03:18 PM
Dman's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 7,005
I know Camilla, Anne and Sophie take precedence over Catherine but I'm mainly talking about the precedence of the royals attending events.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #811  
Old 10-03-2012, 03:28 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
I know Camilla, Anne and Sophie take precedence over Catherine but I'm mainly talking about the precedence of the royals attending events.
It's more or less the same, actually.
For instance, if a group of royals were to attend an event (such as a wedding), the precedence would determine who arrives when and in what order.
I'm talking about official and semi-official events, which is when Order of Precedence is really implemented anyway. Otherwise, it's of interest mainly for royal watchers.
Reply With Quote
  #812  
Old 10-03-2012, 05:56 PM
Molly2101's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemisia View Post
Actually, Princess Anne - as the Sovereign's daughter - does have precedence over the wife of the Sovereign's grandson.

The Official Order of Precedence
- Queen Elizabeth (The Queen)
- The Duchess of Cornwall (the wife of the Sovereign's eldest son)
- The Countess of Wessex (the wife of the Sovereign's younger son)
- The Princess Royal (the Sovereign's daughter)
- The Duchess of Cambridge (the wife of the Sovereign's grandson)
- Autumn Phillips (the wife of the Sovereign's grandson)
- Princess Beatrice (the Sovereign's granddaughter)
- Princess Eugenie (the Sovereign's granddaughter)
- Lady Louise (the Sovereign's granddaughter)
- Zara Phillips (the Sovereign's granddaughter)
- Lady Serena Stanhope (Wife of the Sovereign's nephew)
- Lady Sarah Chatto (Sovereign's niece)
- Birgitte, Duchess of Gloucester (Wife of the Sovereign's cousin)
- Katharine, Duchess of Kent (Wife of the Sovereign's cousin)
- Princess Michael of Kent (Wife of the Sovereign's cousin)
- Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy (Sovereign's cousin)

The Private Order of Precedence (which is entirely at the Sovereign's will):
- Queen Elizabeth (the Sovereign)
- Princess Anne (British Princess by birth)
- Princess Beatrice (British Princess by birth)
- Princess Eugenie (British Princess by birth)
- Lady Louise (British Princess by birth) *
- Princess Alexandra (British Princess by birth)
- Camilla, The Duchess of Cornwall (British Princess by marriage)
- Sophie, The Countess of Wessex (British Princess by marriage)
- Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge (British Princess by marriage)
- Autumn Phillips
- Zara Phillips

* Assuming we accept Lady Louise is a Princess by birth (as per Letters Patent 1917), despite not using the title.
I always accept Louise as a British Princess, even though she does not use the title. She will always be Princess Louise of Wessex, even if she uses Lady.

The order of precedence is something I don't think I will ever understand. I imagine you really only know how it works when you are a part of it, as it so often changed for occasions. I never understand why if in the order of precedence, Catherine comes after Sophie as she is only the wife of a Grandson, yet when the family process out of churches and such, William is ahead of his uncles. I am guessing procession has nothing to do with precedence? And what is even more confusing is it will all change as soon as Charles becomes King. Andrew and Edward will be pushed right down to coming after any children William and Harry have. It's odd but nothing lasts forever. (Princess Alexandra was 6th in line to the throne at the time of her birth, now she is 41st!)

This whole "3rd Lady of the Land" is quite annoying. Who really cares, they are all HRH, surely they all know they are higher up than most other women in the family.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemisia View Post
It's more or less the same, actually.
][bFor instance, if a group of royals were to attend an event (such as a wedding), the precedence would determine who arrives when and in what order.[/b]
I'm talking about official and semi-official events, which is when Order of Precedence is really implemented anyway. Otherwise, it's of interest mainly for royal watchers.
Zara's wedding was obviously a private event, but William arrived after Edward and Andrew (Edward arrived, then Andrew etc.), yet the precedence lists him before William. It is so confusing, particularly when it changes from occasion to occasion.

On the Order of Precedence wikipedia page (it is Wikipedia, however) the precedence for females lists Autumn before the Queen's grand daughters as she is the wife of a Sovereign's grandson. Surely that is not correct.
__________________
"I am yours, you are mine, of that be sure. You are locked in my heart, the little key is lost and now you must stay there forever."
Written by Princess Alix of Hesse and by Rhine in the diary of her fiance, Tsarevich Nicholas.
Reply With Quote
  #813  
Old 10-03-2012, 06:38 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by Molly2101 View Post
I always accept Louise as a British Princess, even though she does not use the title. She will always be Princess Louise of Wessex, even if she uses Lady.
I am in complete agreement with you. Until such time new Letters Patent are issued, Lady Louise is a British Princess by birth.
Of course, honouring her parents' and the Queen's wishes, I always refer to her as Lady Louise (not that they would care if I didn't).
Quote:
Zara's wedding was obviously a private event, but William arrived after Edward and Andrew (Edward arrived, then Andrew etc.), yet the precedence lists him before William. It is so confusing, particularly when it changes from occasion to occasion.
Zara's wedding was indeed a private affair and guests could arrive in pretty much any order they wanted or the hosts had stipulated.
Prince Charles and Diana's wedding would give a more accurate outlook at how precedent works; because it was a state occasion, everyone arrived in the precise order they were supposed to, the last one (apart from the bride, of course) being the Duke of Edinburgh, the Queen Mother and the Queen.
Quote:
On the Order of Precedence wikipedia page (it is Wikipedia, however) the precedence for females lists Autumn before the Queen's grand daughters as she is the wife of a Sovereign's grandson. Surely that is not correct.
It is actually quite accurate, and indeed I have Autumn listed above the Queen's granddaughters in my Official Precedence list as well.
Autumn is the wife of the Sovereign's grandson. In essence, she is no different to the Duchess of Cambridge or Prince Harry's future wife.
Just because Peter Phillips is an untitled commoner, it doesn't change the fact he is the Queen's grandson. In past, the situation when the Sovereign's grandson had no titles simply didn't exist. Princess Anne's decision not to accept any titles for her children created an entirely new situation but did not change the Precedence.
Reply With Quote
  #814  
Old 10-03-2012, 08:00 PM
Dman's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 7,005
Actually the Order of Precedence did apply to Mike & Zara's wedding. Here you can see the order of arrivals for the royal family-



Here you can see the order of departures-

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #815  
Old 10-04-2012, 12:57 PM
Molly2101's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemisia View Post
I am in complete agreement with you. Until such time new Letters Patent are issued, Lady Louise is a British Princess by birth.[

Of course, honouring her parents' and the Queen's wishes, I always refer to her as Lady Louise (not that they would care if I didn't).
Exactly. Until the Letters change, Louise is still a Princess by birth and I do wish her parents allowed her and James to use their Princely statuses, but I also commend them for wishing their children lead private lives and do not end up being in the situation Beatrice and Eugenie are in. I have no doubt that Charles will issue new Letters as soon as he is King. Would that mean that Louise and James would have no right to use their Princely titles if they ever wanted to? Would they be completely stripped of them? I refer to her as Lady Louise too, but there is always a little voice that says "Princess Lou!" (although Lady Lou sounds cuter.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
Actually the Order of Precedence did apply to Mike & Zara's wedding. Here you can see the order of arrivals for the royal family-

Royal Wedding: Zara Phillips Weds Mike Tindall - part 1 - YouTube

Here you can see the order of departures-

Royal Wedding: Zara Phillips Weds Mike Tindall - part 2 - YouTube
Now you see, Edward arrived first, yet William arrived just before his father even though he is below both Andrew and Edward. On the way out the family obviously walked out of the church as they do in many occasions (sSuch as the Diamond Jubilee service) when William coming before his uncles. That is always how it is, yet if precedence is correct William is after his uncles. It is a confusing process!

Zara and Peter did not arrive in Royal cars with Anne for the Diamond Jubilee service (nor did they leave in one either), however they walked out of the church behind their mother and they sat at the front with the other family members. I know they are not titled Royals, but it is obvious that this was following precedence, putting them before the Gloucester's and Kents. It was the same with the Royal wedding, the Phillip's did not arrive in cars with their other mother, aunt, uncles and cousins yet they walked out after them. Is there a reason for this or is it simply because they are not HRH? I understand Louise travelled with her parents due to her being under 18, therefore taking her parents' precedence, but when she turns 18 will she then be beind with Peter and Zara? (How odd it will look with Louise walking with Peter and Zara after she is 18, yet James will be with his parents. Will that happen?)
__________________
"I am yours, you are mine, of that be sure. You are locked in my heart, the little key is lost and now you must stay there forever."
Written by Princess Alix of Hesse and by Rhine in the diary of her fiance, Tsarevich Nicholas.
Reply With Quote
  #816  
Old 10-04-2012, 01:05 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,181
I am under the understanding that prince/ss is a courtesy title and carries with it NO legal standing. How can people say Louise or James are legally prince/ss? Legally to me , means they would have recourse in the courts and I don't how a courtesy would hold up in court.

This style of Prince "is purely a courtesy and the holders of that title remain commoners until they are raised to the Peerage, the only exception being the eldest son of the Sovereign who at birth or, as in the case of Prince Charles, at his mother's accession to the Throne, immediately becomes Duke of Cornwall" (H. Austin Strutt, assistant under-secretary of state, in a memo dated June 17th, 1954 prepared for the Home Secretary; HO 286/50). See also Garter's statement that "the title of Prince is (in this country) normally a courtesy title indicating certain degrees of relationship to the Sovereign and having no power to govern." --- http://www.heraldica.org
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #817  
Old 10-04-2012, 01:17 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425

The titles of British Prince and Princesses are entirely at the will of the Sovereign who can bestow or taken them away. In 1917, George V issued Letters Patent which, among other things, contained regulation as to who is automatically entitled to be styled as a British Prince or Princess. Lady Louise, as male-line granddaughter of the Monarch, falls under that category.

Until such time as new Letters Patent and/or Royal Proclamations are issued nullifying or modifying the 1917 one, Lady Louise and Viscount Severn can legally be considered to be a Princess and Prince.

When Peers inherit their titles, they don't have to do anything with the courts either; they simply ascend to certain titles by means stipulated in the original Letters Patent that had created their respective titles.
Reply With Quote
  #818  
Old 10-04-2012, 01:23 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke-of-Earl View Post
I am under the understanding that prince/ss is a courtesy title and carries with it NO legal standing. How can people say Louise or James are legally prince/ss? Legally to me , means they would have recourse in the courts and I don't how a courtesy would hold up in court.
Because the 1917 Letters Patent, which have not been revised, grant the style and titulature of HRH Prince/Princess of the United Kingdom to male line granchildren of the monarch. So as male line grandchildren Louise and James would be covered by the Letters Patent. They are styled as the children of an earl because that is what their parents wanted and HM agreed. It is also fully in line with slimming down the BRF. Any member of the BRF who is not a peer is legally a commoner regardless of how they are styled and titled.
This is not the first time that a British princess has been known by something other than their princely title. Edward VII granted his female line granddaughters the style and title of HH Princess of the UK. George V did not approve of this so when his niece HH Princess Maud of Fife married he stated that she would be known as Lady Carnegie. Her title as princess was never formally revoked she simply stopped being known as such.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #819  
Old 10-04-2012, 01:37 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,181
But according to Bitish law, only Peerages need to be created by LPs. (Because they carry with them legal responsibility) All other styles and titles, other than a Peerage can bestowed by warrant, press release or verbal declaration,
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #820  
Old 10-04-2012, 01:45 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
I think this conversation is moving away from the topic of precendence which is different than titles.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
order of precedence, protocol


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Danish Orders and Monograms davo Royal House of Denmark 156 08-08-2014 12:36 PM
Danish Royal Family, Current Events 1: April 2003 - March 2008 Julia Current Events Archive 506 03-23-2008 05:56 PM
Princess Madeleine at the Ball of the Order of Innocence; 2003 Josefine Princess Madeleine and Chris O'Neill 62 11-19-2005 04:27 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria duchess of cambridge dutch royal history fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri infanta leonor infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg nobility olympic games ottoman pom pregnancy president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess anita princess astrid princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess mabel princess madeleine princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:41 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]