Order of Precedence 1: Ending 2022

[Skippyboo]

Imagine the Pre-Christmas family dinner at BP when the whole extended family comes, everyone would be tuckered out before the first course if everyone bowed and curtseyed to each other. It is only the Queen and DoE ( the Queen Mum too when she was alive). If you watch this year's balcony footage after Trooping the Colour, Kate curtseys to the DoE when she comes out.

Going by the Rememberance Day & Gartner Day, William was ahead of his uncles and the Princess Royal. There is video of the BP reception for the olympics which is interesting - all of the royals where there except for Charles, Camilla, Wills & Harry. The video showed the Queen, Philip, then Anne (President of the British Olympic Organization) and then Kate greeting the PM and other officials.

 

[padams2359]

I truly believe that if there were a BRF event and Zara walked in after the PoW, but before the Queen, and sat in the chair directly next the Queen's, there are people on this thread would have an embolism.

 

[Artemisia]

Not an embolism perhaps but definitely a headache from trying to figure out what the hell is going on with the order of precedence and the meaning behind such an unusual move. It's just fun, really; we (participants of this thread) probably take all the precedence and ranking stuff a lot more seriously than royals themselves.

 

[branchg]

I've read that Beatrice and Eugenie come before Kate because they are blood princesses. So if William and Kate have a child which will obviously be a blood prince or princess, and Kate still is not a blood "anything", does Kate have to curtsey to her own child?

No. HRH does not curtsey or bow to each other as they hold equal rank. The only exception is The Duke of Edinburgh, who does receive the honour as he is the Consort.

Beatrice and Eugenie come before Catherine at court if they are all present without William. For official occasions, Catherine takes William's precedence and comes before the Princesses of the Blood.

 

[Iluvbertie]

We actually don't know if the HRH's bow or curtsey to each other because we aren't there to see them - that is an assumption.

We have had stories about Margaret or Anne refusing to curtsey to Diana or refusing to allow her post-divorce to curtsey to them or both - which suggests that HRHs do actually curtsey to each other when meeting privately - when there are no cameras around etc when we don't know how they greet each other.

When we do see them it is usually after they have already gathered together to leave from a central place and thus we don't see the first greet but only later ones.

 

[Meraude]

When it comes to the private order of precedence where princesses of the blood is placed before princesses married into the family, it's the queen who have decided that order, and I can understand that she feels closer to her daughter, granddaughters and a favourite cousin, than to women who have married into the family, and perhaps she wants to acknowledge their status within the family. She is after all a mother and grandmother as well as a sovereign.

 

[branchg]

We actually don't know if the HRH's bow or curtsey to each other because we aren't there to see them - that is an assumption.

We have had stories about Margaret or Anne refusing to curtsey to Diana or refusing to allow her post-divorce to curtsey to them or both - which suggests that HRHs do actually curtsey to each other when meeting privately - when there are no cameras around etc when we don't know how they greet each other.

When we do see them it is usually after they have already gathered together to leave from a central place and thus we don't see the first greet but only later ones.

If it happens, it is simply a courtesy as it is not required by court protocol. It certainly is expected to be granted to The Queen and Prince Philip.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Where is this court protocol listed? Please link to something official from the court that says that.

 

[Rocketmom]

As for precedence for men, I still believe that the Official Precedence (which is governed by law and traditions, and cannot be changed on the spot even by the Sovereign) places William and Harry below Andrew and Edward. The Private Precedence, on the other hand, appears to be different, placing the Wales kids immediately after their father and ahead of Andrew and Edward.

Most of the times, William's apparent precedence over his uncles is pretty easy to explain: William and Harry usually arrive with Prince Charles and Camilla, as a family, giving an appearance they are "ahead" of Andrew and Edward. This said, I admit finding it hard to explain William's precedence over his uncles at the Remembrance Day ceremony - a highly official event. If he had represented his father, that would have made sense, but he didn't.

Wasn't that point made during the balcony appearance for the Queen's jubilee when only Charles, Camilla, William, Kate and Harry appeared with the Queen? That was explained that she was honoring the MOST immediate line of succession, which would solidify the fact that William is ahead of his uncles.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

The Duke of Cambridge takes precedence over his uncles during the Garter procession and service as well.

 

[Artemisia]

Wasn't that point made during the balcony appearance for the Queen's jubilee when only Charles, Camilla, William, Kate and Harry appeared with the Queen? That was explained that she was honoring the MOST immediate line of succession, which would solidify the fact that William is ahead of his uncles.

I'm not sure the balcony appearance has anything to do with precedence though.
The Queen simply wanted the focus to be on the core members of the Royal Family - the Wales family. But that doesn't really change precedence.

Again, this is my opinion; I am not trying to convince anyone of anything and respect other people's point of view.

 

[muriel]

I'm not sure the balcony appearance has anything to do with precedence though.
The Queen simply wanted the focus to be on the core members of the Royal Family - the Wales family. But that doesn't really change precedence.

Again, this is my opinion; I am not trying to convince anyone of anything and respect other people's point of view.

I agree with you, the balcony appearance at the Jubilee celebrations was really about clearly reinforcing the focus on the "main line".

 

[Lee-Z]

Fascinating thread, and i can just imagine QEII herself reading this and thinking of a new order of her relatives for the next event, just to utterly confuse us

What i was wondering: does it matter how long someone is 'in the family' with regards to any signs of curtesy? I could imagine that if i would i were Kate, i would have been mighty embarrassed if members of the family bowed or curtsied to me and i would probably curtsey everyone except maybe for small children...

 

[Artemisia]

Fascinating thread, and i can just imagine QEII herself reading this and thinking of a new order of her relatives for the next event, just to utterly confuse us

Given the recent reports of her somewhat mischievous character, that wouldn't surprise me at all.

What i was wondering: does it matter how long someone is 'in the family' with regards to any signs of curtesy? I could imagine that if i would i were Kate, i would have been mighty embarrassed if members of the family bowed or curtsied to me and i would probably curtsey everyone except maybe for small children...

In theory, it shouldn't matter at all: precedence is determined by degree of relation to the reigning Sovereign. Thus, Kate - as wife of the Sovereign's grandson - automatically climbed to the 4th spot in the Official Order of Precedence (The Queen -> The Duchess of Cornwall -> The Countess of Wessex -> The Duchess of Cambridge).

In practice, it may be that new members of the royal family choose to show respect towards elder members who, technically, hold lower precedence. For instance, Kate curtseyed to the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester on at least one occasion (the Jubilee Dinner) although she certainly didn't have to.

Kate hardly needs to worry about elder ladies (such as Princess Anne, Princess Alexandra or the Duchesses of Kent and Gloucester) curtseying to her; these days, British royals tend to bow/curtsey only to the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh unless it's some super official/state event.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

In practice, it may be that new members of the royal family choose to show respect towards elder members who, technically, hold lower precedence. For instance, Kate curtseyed to the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester on at least one occasion (the Jubilee Dinner) although she certainly didn't have to.

I didn't know Catherine curtseyed to the Gloucesters. Thats kind of cool actually. One way to ingratiate yourself with HM, is by showing respect to the 'elders' of the BRF.

 

[Artemisia]

It was during the Jubilee Lunch for Monarchs.
I must add though that during the pre-lunch reception, Kate curtseyed to pretty much all royal ladies of more advanced years (of British and foreign royal families).

I agree it was a nice touch; if I were in Kate's shoes, I would have no problems with curtseying to, say, the Duchess of Gloucester or Princess Alexandra - two ladies who have dedicated their lives to serving their country and supporting the Queen. It's a matter of respect, regardless on one's position in the Order of Precedence.

 

[Rocketmom]

Given the recent reports of her somewhat mischievous character, that wouldn't surprise me at all.
In theory, it shouldn't matter at all: precedence is determined by degree of relation to the reigning Sovereign. Thus, Kate - as wife of the Sovereign's grandson - automatically climbed to the 4th spot in the Official Order of Precedence (The Queen -> The Duchess of Cornwall -> The Countess of Wessex -> The Duchess of Cambridge).

In practice, it may be that new members of the royal family choose to show respect towards elder members who, technically, hold lower precedence. For instance, Kate curtseyed to the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester on at least one occasion (the Jubilee Dinner) although she certainly didn't have to.

Kate hardly needs to worry about elder ladies (such as Princess Anne, Princess Alexandra or the Duchesses of Kent and Gloucester) curtseying to her; these days, British royals tend to bow/curtsey only to the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh unless it's some super official/state event.

I can envision all these ladies bobbing up and down when each one is curtseying to the others because they can't keep it straight either.

 

[padams2359]

I think they do curtesy to the older relatives. I want to say there was a small dip by Anne to either the DoG or Princess Alex at some event. That makes sense. Simple Respect.

 

[branchg]

I think they do curtesy to the older relatives. I want to say there was a small dip by Anne to either the DoG or Princess Alex at some event. That makes sense. Simple Respect.

Why would Anne curtsey to The Duchess of Gloucester or Princess Alexandra? She is the daughter of The Sovereign and they are minor members of the royal family.

 

[kbk]

For instance, Camilla - as wife of the Duke of Cornwall - is the second lady in the Kingdom in the Official Order of the Precedence. However, in the Private one, she (as British Princess by marriage) ranks below Princesses by blood of her generation - Anne and Alexandra. That doesn't mean in any way Camilla has to curtsey to either.

Actually, Alexandra is not of Camilla and Anne's generation in the Royal house...

[...] However, in the Private one she [Kate] is ranked below Princesses by blood of her generation - Beatrice and Eugenie. Again, she most definitely doesn't have to curtsey to the girls under any circumstances.

I think it is a general rule so all the princesses by birth come before all princesses by marriage, excluding the minors of course, who are Beatrice, Eugenie (or maybe they've just turned pro?), and Louise. Thus, generation that one belongs to does not matter here.

 

[kbk]

I completely don't understand your point now. I think you are confusing here the order of precedence with the order of succession to the throne! With an addition of the Letters Patent of 1917 and general rules of dynastic seniority...
Again, could you recite your source?

Where is this court protocol listed? Please link to something official from the court that says that.

Why would Anne curtsey to The Duchess of Gloucester or Princess Alexandra? She is the daughter of The Sovereign and they are minor members of the royal family.

Branchg,....?? Do not be ignorant!

 

[NGalitzine]

Why would Anne curtsey to The Duchess of Gloucester or Princess Alexandra? She is the daughter of The Sovereign and they are minor members of the royal family.

Exactly my question. It can't be age because the Duchess is not that much older than Anne and even Alexandra is only 14 yrs older.

 

[Roslyn]

I am looking forward to the reply to branchg's question.

 

[branchg]

Not always. Diana took her court precedence after The Queen, The Queen Mother and Princess Margaret, but before all others including Anne.

 

[AdmirerUS]

I just want to point out that Catherine and an official preceded William and official coming down the platform from the train this a.m. in Cambridge. The world did not quit spinning on its axis and William seemed utterly unconcerned. I think precedence is the most knowingly violated royal practice that we talk about in the forums.

If there were red cards and yellow flags for precedence violations by royals on official visits, the poor referees would be worn out.

 

[Artemisia]

Not always. Diana took her court precedence after The Queen, The Queen Mother and Princess Margaret, but before all others including Anne.

Was Diana really after Margaret? As far as I know, during her marriage to Charles she - as the Princess of Wales - was the third lady in the Kingdom after the Queen and the Queen Mother, and retained that precedence after the divorce. I am not aware of any Private Order of Precedence that put Margaret ahead of Diana either.

 

[branchg]

Branchg,....?? Do not be ignorant!

Excuse me? Don't be so rude and obnoxious please. Several of your postings have been completely incorrect and easily checked against information that is readily available, not to mention corrected by others.

I am sorry if you insist on being always correct, but you are not.

 

[branchg]

Was Diana really after Margaret? As far as I know, during her marriage to Charles she - as the Princess of Wales - was the third lady in the Kingdom after the Queen and the Queen Mother, and retained that precedence after the divorce. I am not aware of any Private Order of Precedence that put Margaret ahead of Diana either.

At court, Margaret always proceeded Diana (if females only were present, which again, is relatively rare). Usually, the official order is more or less followed even at court because their husbands are present anyway.

 

[Artemisia]

At court, Margaret always proceeded Diana (if females only were present, which again, is relatively rare). Usually, the official order is more or less followed even at court because their husbands are present anyway.

I always trust your judgement and extensive knowledge on the subject but could you provide some sort of a source for that?
I find it hard to accept that the Princess of Wales would, for whatever reason, have lower precedence than the Sovereign's sister.

Assuming it is so though, it would mean the Queen decision to put Camilla (and, later, Kate) after Princesses by blood is nothing new.

 

[kbk]

I did not mean to be rude or offensive to you, Branchg. But please, do cite some reliable source for what you are saying here. "It's not true" or "that's a fact" are not adequate answers for me.