The Royal Family Order (RFO) and other Royal Orders and Decorations 1: Ending 2022

[Iluvbertie]

The 'has to be a full-time working royal' for two years fall down when you realise Anne received it before becoming a full-time working royal. She didn't do that until the late 70s - after she retired from competing as an equestrienne. Alexandra received it in 1952 - while still basically a school girl.

The Queen gives the RFO to those she feels deserves it and so far the only conclusion I can draw is that she doesn't believe Kate deserves it. Why?

Well let's look at Fergie - she was a full-time working royal basically from her marriage onwards but never received it so why not? After two years there were no issues really ... but having given the award to Diana after a few months and having that marriage effectively over by the end of 1984 (even Diana suggests this date - not to go into the breakdown of the marriage but to give some context to my argument) the Queen decided she wanted to be sure of the security of the marriage before investing the wife so the fact that Kate doesn't appear to have the order suggests she sees something not quite right in the marriage and she is closer to it than we are. We can only judge from pictures and videos while she sees them together out of the public eye and may very well know things we don't.

The Queen will give her the RFO when she, the Queen, believes she has earnt it and it is as simple as that.

As for Philip's award - it was the only one he hadn't had and interestingly the one she had given to everyone except Philip, Charles and William. Now only her heirs don't have it but no one seems to be kicking up a fuss about the fact that obviously Charles and William don't give her sufficient support.

 

[Rudolph]

So everyone in the family who has GCVO supported the The Queen more than her husband of 70 years who just received it?

Prince Edward is a bigger supporter to her than her husband?

As for Kate I’m firmly in the anti ivory camp. I think she has the RFO but the The Queen understands the politics behind for William.

 

[Dman]

The 'has to be a full-time working royal' for two years fall down when you realise Anne received it before becoming a full-time working royal. She didn't do that until the late 70s - after she retired from competing as an equestrienne. Alexandra received it in 1952 - while still basically a school girl.

The Queen gives the RFO to those she feels deserves it and so far the only conclusion I can draw is that she doesn't believe Kate deserves it. Why?

Well let's look at Fergie - she was a full-time working royal basically from her marriage onwards but never received it so why not? After two years there were no issues really ... but having given the award to Diana after a few months and having that marriage effectively over by the end of 1984 (even Diana suggests this date - not to go into the breakdown of the marriage but to give some context to my argument) the Queen decided she wanted to be sure of the security of the marriage before investing the wife so the fact that Kate doesn't appear to have the order suggests she sees something not quite right in the marriage and she is closer to it than we are. We can only judge from pictures and videos while she sees them together out of the public eye and may very well know things we don't.

The Queen will give her the RFO when she, the Queen, believes she has earnt it and it is as simple as that.

As for Philip's award - it was the only one he hadn't had and interestingly the one she had given to everyone except Philip, Charles and William. Now only her heirs don't have it but no one seems to be kicking up a fuss about the fact that obviously Charles and William don't give her sufficient support.

This is what I was afraid of. People will start drawing conclusions about the Cambridge marriage over this.

Now, we still don’t know if she don’t have it, because we didn’t get a proper glimpse of Catherine left shoulder in the car.

 

[Gaudete]

Please correct me if I'm wrong but your basis for this convention is the years in which Sophie and Camilla received their orders, isn't it? Or has this ever been confirmed?

Diana got hers in the year she married as did the duchess of Kent. The duchess of Gloucester (who was only princess Richard at that point) got it the year after they married; and princess Anne at 19 years of age. So, none of them had been fulltime royals for 2 years at that point.

Sorry for joining the discussion so late, just wanted to make sure that I understand the evidence that the claim is based on.

You’ve missed a very important word of what I said. This is the way HM does it NOW. It’s a recent change and no doubt she’s done it that way since 2000 because marriages sometimes don’t last. I didn’t say she set that rule in place for the Princess Royal or the Duchess of Kent or Diana (though they were full time working royals from the start) - I simply said that that’s the way HM prefers to do it today.

But I can see this conversation is just going to go round and round and it’s not that vital to me to win the debate. I’m suggesting that the new convention means that Kate will get it in two years time. If she gets it before, great. If she gets it in two years, great. If she never gets it, fine.

With all that’s going on in the world, I’ll never understand all the fuss over a little badge on a yellow ribbon.

 

[Dman]

I know people don’t understand why this is an issue, but after all this time and work, Catherine’s lack of the basic family order sticks out like a sore thumb.

It’s rather silly for there to be a two year wait to receive the family order by doing the same stuff ones been doing for seven years already. It’s like folks are waiting for Catherine to come up with a cure for cancer.

 

[Somebody]

You’ve missed a very important word of what I said. This is the way HM does it NOW. It’s a recent change and no doubt she’s done it that way since 2000 because marriages sometimes don’t last. I didn’t say she set that rule in place for the Princess Royal or the Duchess of Kent or Diana (though they were full time working royals from the start) - I simply said that that’s the way HM prefers to do it today.

But I can see this conversation is just going to go round and round and it’s not that vital to me to win the debate. I’m suggesting that the new convention means that Kate will get it in two years time. If she gets it before, great. If she gets it in two years, great. If she never gets it, fine.

With all that’s going on in the world, I’ll never understand all the fuss over a little badge on a yellow ribbon.

Thanks for clarifying. Of course the queen might have changed her thinking on this issue although I would caution againsg drawing vonclusions based on only 2 examples.

Not sure how and why you link 2 year as a full time working royal and marriages sometimes don't last. Does a marriage become more stable after 2 years of being a formal working royal. Or is that how you explain the change from 'previously the only thing that mattered was being a member of the royal family', since the marital problems of Charles and Diana the new rule is that you have to earn it by being a full time working royal.

Even if the above is true, to me it still seems unfair to Catherine as there is quite a difference between dedicating your whole life to royal service from the moment you get married (as Catherine has done, even though William had a job, so she couldn't outdo him) vs having a job and only doing a few royal activities a year before embracing your role as a royal (cf. Sophie).

How do you explain that Sarah never got one (15 years befor 2000)? And that princess Michael still doesn't have one although she got married in the 70's?

As was indicated by others, Anne was not a full time working royal from the start and Brigitte was never expected to be one when she got it... So, to me the mystery remains.

 

[Gaudete]

As I said, from 2000 onwards, things have been done a certain way. I can’t claim to know how the Queen thinks but I suggested as a reason, maybe, perhaps, she prefers to wait a little while before giving the RFO to women who marry in.

The recent convention (I stress both words) is as follows: Sophie became a full time working royal in 2002. She got it in 2004. Camilla was a full time working royal from her marriage in 2005 and got it in 2007.

It would suggest to me, and I could be wrong, I absolutely don’t mind being wrong, that the Queen prefers to wait a little while instead of giving it automatically and she seems to use the rule that one must be a full time working royal for two years before it’s given.

I don’t know what else I can say without going round and round in circles. I haven’t spoken to Her Majesty, I don’t know that that’s her rule, I’m simply suggesting that based on recent examples that’s her criteria and if it is, Kate will get it in 2019.

If she’s already got it and doesn’t wear it because of the blessed ivory? Fine. If she never gets it? Fine. Anyone who thinks it somehow makes her inferior or shows that the Queen dislikes Kate is free to think so. Personally I’ve never known such a dreadful fuss over something so absolutely insignificant and I’m sure HRH has got better things to do than worry about it either.

 

[Skippyboo]

So everyone in the family who has GCVO supported the The Queen more than her husband of 70 years who just received it?



Prince Edward is a bigger supporter to her than her husband?



As for Kate I’m firmly in the anti ivory camp. I think she has the RFO but the The Queen understands the politics behind for William.

William is basically the frontman for a public campaign to stop use of ivory. His wife who gets worldwide coverage can’t show up at a state dinner wearing ivory when William is telling the people of Asia and Africa not to use ivory for decoration or other purposes.

The Queen would fully understand this. So it quite possible Kate was given a RFO and doesn’t wear it with the Queen’s blessing. Let’s not forget Kate has been loaned some pretty personal jewelry from the Queen that no other family members have worn before like Philip’s bracelet given at the time of their engagement. If the Queen had some sort of suspicion or didn’t approve of Kate-no way is Kate wearing these jewels.

 

[Pranter]

William is basically the frontman for a public campaign to stop use of ivory. His wife who gets worldwide coverage can’t show up at a state dinner wearing ivory when William is telling the people of Asia and Africa not to use ivory for decoration or other purposes.

The Queen would fully understand this. So it quite possible Kate was given a RFO and doesn’t wear it with the Queen’s blessing. Let’s not forget Kate has been loaned some pretty personal jewelry from the Queen that no other family members have worn before like Philip’s bracelet given at the time of their engagement. If the Queen had some sort of suspicion or didn’t approve of Kate-no way is Kate wearing these jewels.

Yes this is what I think too.


LaRae

 

[ladongas]

William is basically the frontman for a public campaign to stop use of ivory. His wife who gets worldwide coverage can’t show up at a state dinner wearing ivory when William is telling the people of Asia and Africa not to use ivory for decoration or other purposes.

The Queen would fully understand this. So it quite possible Kate was given a RFO and doesn’t wear it with the Queen’s blessing. Let’s not forget Kate has been loaned some pretty personal jewelry from the Queen that no other family members have worn before like Philip’s bracelet given at the time of their engagement. If the Queen had some sort of suspicion or didn’t approve of Kate-no way is Kate wearing these jewels.

Yes, I think so,too.

I also think that trying to imply that HM sees something wrong in the Cambridge marriage is pretty shabby.

 

[Dman]

I’ve always said, if the use of ivory in the family order is a problem, a porcelain base could be used to make Catherine a new order.

Why leave her without a family order after all this time? If she just married William last summer, her not having the Order would be understandable.

Seven years on and no family order? C’mon now!

 

[Nico]

William is basically the frontman for a public campaign to stop use of ivory. His wife who gets worldwide coverage can’t show up at a state dinner wearing ivory when William is telling the people of Asia and Africa not to use ivory for decoration or other purposes.

The Queen would fully understand this. So it quite possible Kate was given a RFO and doesn’t wear it with the Queen’s blessing. Let’s not forget Kate has been loaned some pretty personal jewelry from the Queen that no other family members have worn before like Philip’s bracelet given at the time of their engagement. If the Queen had some sort of suspicion or didn’t approve of Kate-no way is Kate wearing these jewels.

Again, it would be seen as frankly rude toward the other royal ladies and the Queen herself wearing their very own orders "look i'm protecting the Elephants but you ladies are basicaly feeding the poachers". I just can't imagine that.
Plus it would so easy, as pointed out several times, to make a pocelain made order especially for Kate.
No Kate was not given the RFO yet, but as explained above, she's literally covered with the Queen's diamonds, a clear sign of trust if needed.

 

[sndral]

Well let's hope, for the sake of ending this debate, that The Queen's gift to Catherine this year is the Family Order
Personally, I think when worn they detract from the beauty of the dress worn, but there are considerations more important than fashion.

 

[Rudolph]

William and Catherine have no control over the Ivory already used by the palace but they do have a choice over whether to wear it.

Can you imagine Catherine sitting at the head table during the Chinese State visit with an ivory broach on her chest while William is lecturing the Chinese President over ivory use. It’s called bad optics. To me it’s every bit as plausible as anything else being floated about.

 

[Skippyboo]

The Royal Family Order (RFO) and other Royal Orders and Decorations

The RFO is probably pretty expensive to make. Charles will be on the throne sooner than later. So the RFOs for Charles would need to be made. At the same time, new ivory free Elizabeth RFOs can be made for those who would need them. Alexandra is the only one that would still have George VI one.

Then everyone is ivory free RFO wise.

 

[wyevale]

Mammoth Tusk 'Ivory' is increasingly being used by Miniaturists.. identical as a surface on which to Paint, and widely available [Lots of skeletons being dug up in China], but ideologically 'blameless' since Mammoths have been extinct for Millennia..

 

[Curryong]

I don't believe that the state of the Cambridge marriage has anything to do with this. Nor do I think that ivory is the issue. It could be however that the Queen is leaving the issue of awarding the first RFOs to the younger generation, primarily her Wales grandsons wives, to Charles. It may be that she feels that will be a duty he will take pleasure in. It's an awful thing to say but perhaps the Queen is feeling her mortality. Of course if she lives for another five or six years she may well change her mind.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

I am not a fan of royals receiving honours simply because they have become royals. I find the Scandinavian royal habits particularly ridiculous as they bestow orders even prior to weddings when surely there should be a period of 'work' done before receiving such an accolade. Some royal families though do wait a bit if time. Charlene Wittstock married her Prince the same year that Kate married William and received the senior Monaco order16 months after the wedding. It was still a bit soon IMO but in comparison to Princess Grace who got her's straight away at least she, kind of, earned it. The British RFO has no tradition of being 'earned' but if this is indeed the road the present Monarch wishes to go down (and there's no proof that it is) then after almost 7 years of marriage, numerous engagements and foreign tours Catherine should surely have it by now.

The Swedish "RFO" is not really an Order. The royal ladies receive these as a memento and can wear these to show attachment to the Sovereign. It is also called The King's Portrait, which in itself already says it is not an Order.

Then the Seraphims for the royals (even as Babies): the Order of the Seraphim is in the first place a dynastic Order. The King is head of the royal dynasty and of the dynastic Orders. The babies are born princes or princesses of the royal dynasty. Daniel, Sophie and Christopher are married into the dynasty. So these Orders must not been seen as a sort "Order of Merit".

In the Netherlands (Orange-Nassau) and in Luxembourg (Nassau) the Order in the Golden Lion of the House Nassau is partly a dynastical Order (in both countries) as well a State Order (in Luxembourg). The Statutes of the Order regulate that children of the Sovereign are a Knight (Dame) Grand Cross by birth. The difference with Sweden is that the actual decorations are given on the 18th birthday. Again: this is no "Order of Merit".

I think we can not consider the RFO as an "Order of Merit" (the Queen herself, her sister and her cousine Alexandra all received one as young girls). The Order of the Garter, when given to royals, must not be seen as an "Order of Merit" but as a visible token of the royal dynasty. We can not argue that William has done such unbelievable and extraordinary acts that he is the youngest Brit to be decorated with the highest of the highest. He only got these because he is who he is in the royal dynasty.

 

[Skippyboo]

The Royal Family Order (RFO) and other Royal Orders and Decorations

There isn’t anything that stops Charles giving his own RFO to people that have the Queen’s. It isn’t a knighthood that cant be given again if you already have it.

There is actually an Order of Merit which is limited to 24 members of the UK & Commonwealth. It’s full of Nobel Prize winners and Philip and Charles. The royals actually count against the 24 unlike the Royal Garter knights.

 

[Curryong]

No there isn't anything to stop Charles from awarding his RFOs to the younger generation after the Queen has done so . It may be though that she is leaving the giving of these to Charles in the first place.

 

[Somebody]

Then the Seraphims for the royals (even as Babies): the Order of the Seraphim is in the first place a dynastic Order. The King is head of the royal dynasty and of the dynastic Orders. The babies are born princes or princesses of the royal dynasty. Daniel, Sophie and Christopher are married into the dynasty. So these Orders must not been seen as a sort "Order of Merit".

Chris never received the Order of the Seraphim as he refused to become a member of the royal house and any titles; to leave him not completely hanging the king made his son-in-law Commander of the Royal Order of the Polar Star.

I think we can not consider the RFO as an "Order of Merit" (the Queen herself, her sister and her cousine Alexandra all received one as young girls). The Order of the Garter, when given to royals, must not be seen as an "Order of Merit" but as a visible token of the royal dynasty. We can not argue that William has done such unbelievable and extraordinary acts that he is the youngest Brit to be decorated with the highest of the highest. He only got these because he is who he is in the royal dynasty.

Agreed that the RFO isn't really an order of merit. Most grand cross members of any order didn't receive it because of merit, but just because of the position they were in (born, married, voted or appointed). Why for example would foreign kings, queens and even princes en princesses of other countries be more deserving of the Dutch non-house orders than princess Laurentien - or than all the Dutch people that might do lots of good for Dutch society (same goes of course for British and other societies in relation to their orders) and if they are lucky receive the lowest or second lowest grade of those orders. So, it is really ceremonially. The question of course remains how the queen goes about this ceremonial act... and why she does it the way she does (which we probably never will know for sure).

 

[JR76]

The Swedish "RFO" is not really an Order. The royal ladies receive these as a memento and can wear these to show attachment to the Sovereign. It is also called The King's Portrait, which in itself already says it is not an Order.

You hit the nail on the head there, Duc. There is no Swedish RFO. In Swedish it's called "Kungens porträtt" which as you wrote translates as "The Kings portrait".
I don't know if the misconception about it being an Order has its base in a mistranslation or a misunderstanding by someone who, as often happens, assumes that everything in Royal Europe is exactly the same as in the UK.

 

[cepe]

Dropping into this thread always reminds me of Christmas - favourite programmes repeated.

For what it's worth - I think Catherine not receiving this is about ivory. I don't think HMQ has a problem with Catherine and her work and support of the BRF. I think that is why Catherine is in receipt of significant royal jewels. The bracelet created by Philip for the Queen set me off in this direction and nothing has happened to change my mind.

I also think that Catherine isn't worried about what people think because she is secure in the knowledge that she is a true part of the family both personally and "professionally".

What I don't understand is why she cant wear the thing reversed (usually the royal cypher in precious stones/metal on enamel) without showing the image of the Queen. Maybe there is a reason for this such as pin and settings.

But what I am convinced of is that HMQ does not have an issue with the Duchess of Cambridge.

EDIT: just found picture of reverse - understand now http://www.medals.org.uk/united-kingdom/images/united-kingdom671.jpg

 

[W.Y.CII]

What I don't understand is why she cant wear the thing reversely (usually the royal cypher in precious stones/metal on enamel) without showing the image of the Queen. Maybe there is a reason for this such as pin and settings.

I don't see the point for her to wear it reversed. If you receive an order then just wear it in the way that it should be, I don't think there is any order allows that much variation. Wearing it reversely is like wearing another order.




A question about the Garter, does Charles have another version of badge rather than the usual gold one?

 

[Dman]

I don't see the point for her to wear it reversed. If you receive an order then just wear it in the way that it should be, I don't think there is any order allows that much variation. Wearing it reversely is like wearing another order.




A question about the Garter, does Charles have another version of badge rather than the usual gold one?

Many of the Lesser George’s are designed differently. Prince Charles is just wearing a different design. Likely one worn from a previous member of the royal family.

 

[W.Y.CII]

I know they would wear badge/star from previous member, but I remember I have seen Charles also wore the gold one before. I thought they would just stick to particular one (like the item is assigned to somebody, only he/she would wear it and the newcomer would pick the other one).

 

[padams2359]

Maybe as heir apparent, he has one with more precious stones like his mother's.

 

[wbenson]

Yes, Prince Charles wears a different version of the Lesser George at evening events. I think his star might be different too, and I can't find a picture that shows enough detail but I think he may have enhanced versions of the Bath insignia too. He wears the standard gold Lesser George on his uniforms, and so did the Queen back when she rode at her birthday parade. Edit: This picture gives a closer look at his Garter and Bath stars, and his badge of the Order of the Bath. The Bath star looks like it could be this one, commissioned for Prince Albert.

Custom jeweled insignia used to be more common, in and out of the royal family, but I think that's mostly gone out of style, for reasons of economy but also of taste. A lot of the designs aren't very masculine to modern eyes, and formal evening events are much less common than they used to be.

 

[muriel]

I believe the Cambridge’s will be at the State Banquet.

And we do hope the Duchess is wearing an RFO and a sash on the said eve.

 

[Parrothead]

And we do hope the Duchess is wearing an RFO and a sash on the said eve.

There is not a sash that goes with the RFO (if she has yet received it). She would only get a sash from a foreign order or is she was given an order from QEII.