Bowing and Curtseying


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
It showed respect and followed the dictates of exquisite good manners on that occasion

It's interesting isn't it.

I found it inappropriate that the First Lady of France curtsied to the Queen of England. As a much younger and incredibly inexperienced (diplomatically speaking) lady I can empathise, if not think this breech of protocol, rather charming on Mrs Sarkozy's behalf.

Though as wife to the President of the French Republic it was not appropriate, no matter how exquisite such manners may have seemed. Mrs Sarkozy is a consort and consort's, along with their reigning spouses, do not observe, nor extend such veneration. And nor should they...:flowers:
 
Last edited:
I would have to assume that should you ever be in a position where a bow or a curtsey is de rigiour, you would be there by choice. And, having made that choice, it would be incumbent on you to follow the dictates of good manners.

Even the wife of the French President did not find it demeaning to curtsey to HM QEII. It showed respect and followed the dictates of exquisite good manners on that occasion. To do otherwise would have been, to quote PrinceOfCanada, unspeakably rude.

I said thsese numberous times and will continue to say this you do not need
to bow or curtsey it depends on which royal and what country.
 
Last edited:
In other words, you don't actually wish to show them respect in the appropriate way. That's your prerogative of course, but it's unspeakably rude.

Yet most of the palaces don't see it that way, at least officially. In fact (at least in the case of Buckingham Palace), they speak about it and call it optional.
 
Even the wife of the French President did not find it demeaning to curtsey to HM QEII. It showed respect and followed the dictates of exquisite good manners on that occasion. To do otherwise would have been, to quote PrinceOfCanada, unspeakably rude.

I'll follow the palace's advice, which invariably uses the word "optional" or some synonym of it. (And I would opt to do it)
 
Yet most of the palaces don't see it that way, at least officially. In fact (at least in the case of Buckingham Palace), they speak about it and call it optional.

They call it optional so as to avoid the appearance of "you must do this or else". It's roughly as optional as showing up in a t-shirt when white tie is the dress code.
 
I think that it was very charming of Madame Sarkozy to curtsey as well as being good manners. I hope that Mrs.Rudd (the Australian PM's wife) did the same, but probably not.

I also thought that Rudd's talk about our eventually becoming a republic was very rude, just before he met the Queen. He could have just said that it was up to the Australian people.
 
I also thought that Rudd's talk about our eventually becoming a republic was very rude, just before he met the Queen. He could have just said that it was up to the Australian people.

Rude? Hardly.

Our Prime Minister answered the question's which were asked of him, and he did so without pretence. As I recall, he spoke very favourably of Her Majesty and conveyed a great many Australian's afffection for the Queen's dedication.

They call it optional so as to avoid the appearance of "you must do this or else".

It isn't an autocracy.
 
Last edited:
It's roughly as optional as showing up in a t-shirt when white tie is the dress code.
My you do have a way with words!

I have been thinking a little about the social customs we use when we all meet and greet, our families, friends, acquaintances. What a minefield.

Here in good old NZ most just shake hands. If we are really happy to see someone we just clasp our left hand over the clasped right hand. :cool:

If is family it's either an awkward peck on the cheek or a bear hug. If you acquire other nationalities in your family, well if they are Dutch . . . it's a continental peck to both cheeks once you've worked out whether you peck the left or the right cheek first. :doh:

And then, just to throw you, the Brazilian arm of the family arrives and you wonder which, if any, cheek you should peck, and in desparation resort to a peckky bear-hug! :doh:

The etiquette of bowing a curtsying is a no-brainer compared with that minefield! :blush:
 
They call it optional so as to avoid the appearance of "you must do this or else".
It isn't an autocracy.

the "or else" is "or else you are being unforgivably rude, and showing that you have no manners"
 
the "or else" is "or else you are being unforgivably rude, and showing that you have no manners"

You are simply incorrect. There are rules of protocol that address these issues. An American would not curtsey to royalty; they waged a war to become free of the concept. To bow or curtsey would show disrespect to those that lost their lives in the Revolutionary War.

A person that chooses not to curtsey or bow is not being unspeakably rude and does not lack manners. The bending of the knee is a gesture of obeisance, and considered inappropriate by many.

I am sure you will be relieved to know that most of these unforgivably rude people would not bother to meet or seek out royalty; in fact, most American's don't even know that European royalty exists apart from the Queen of England. But if the course of accepting that Nobel Peace prize or embarking on that state visit you happen to come across royalty, you just make your best decision on the curtsey/bow issue and leave it at that.
 
the "or else" is "or else you are being unforgivably rude, and showing that you have no manners"

That just isn't the case.

The Palace recognise that it's now considered a personal choice and I'd be quite certain it concerns some royal watchers more than it concerns the royals. It has nothing to do with being unspeakably rude, rather, has everything to do with remaining constant with social liberty.

I myself would curtsy because I feel it appropriate. My father wouldn't, not because his a disrespectful man (he certainly is not), but he just wouldn't feel comfortable doing so.
 
Last edited:
You are simply incorrect. There are rules of protocol that address these issues. An American would not curtsey to royalty; they waged a war to become free of the concept. To bow or curtsey would show disrespect to those that lost their lives in the Revolutionary War.

Actually, no. The war was waged because they were sick of being taxed without representation in the British Parliament. Royalty was a red herring, as evidenced by the fact that Washington was very nearly made King of the USA.

A person that chooses not to curtsey or bow is not being unspeakably rude and does not lack manners. The bending of the knee is a gesture of obeisance, and considered inappropriate by many.

It was; it is no longer. To bow or to curtsey now is to show respect.

The Palace recognise that it's now considered a personal choice and I'd be quite certain it concerns some royal watchers more than it concerns the royals. It has nothing to do with being unspeakably rude, rather, has everything to do with remaining constant with social liberty.

You go ahead and keep telling yourself that. Refusing to provide the simple and contextually-appropriate gesture of respect merely shows your lack of manners. End of story. As I said above, it's about as optional as flouting the dress code at a banquet or other function. Sure, you can, but it speaks volumes about you. And they're not good volumes.
 
Actually, no. The war was waged because they were sick of being taxed without representation in the British Parliament. Royalty was a red herring, as evidenced by the fact that Washington was very nearly made King of the USA.



It was; it is no longer. To bow or to curtsey now is to show respect.



You go ahead and keep telling yourself that. Refusing to provide the simple and contextually-appropriate gesture of respect merely shows your lack of manners. End of story. As I said above, it's about as optional as flouting the dress code at a banquet or other function. Sure, you can, but it speaks volumes about you. And they're not good volumes.

Well put.

I, even as an American would bow to HM the Queen or any other member of the Royal Family. Not to show submission but to show respect for their position and rank. It's no diffrent to bow/curtsey to royalty then to salute an officer in the military or a Head of State.
 
You go ahead and keep telling yourself that.

Actually, the palace is telling her that. You think the Queen runs around with a little notebook ticking off who does and doesn't curtsy or bow? I can see her now, "ooh, that Kevin Rudd is going to get his comeuppance one day. The next time I go down to Australia, I might just drop my G&T on him."
 
Actually, the palace is telling her that. You think the Queen runs around with a little notebook ticking off who does and doesn't curtsy or bow? I can see her now, "ooh, that Kevin Rudd is going to get his comeuppance one day. The next time I go down to Australia, I might just drop my G&T on him."

Oy gevalt. Yes, the Palace says it's optional. You are completely failing to address the point that the 'choice' of whether or not to bow or curtsey is exactly the same as the 'choice' of whether or not to follow dress code at an event.
 
Actually, the palace is telling her that

Oh it's ok, wbenson...:)...some people just prefer bigotry.

You know, as do I, that the Palace is really quite understanding and appreciates the social and cultural beliefs of the wider community. Quite in tune really.


Welcome to the official web site of the British Monarchy

There are also no obligatory codes of behaviour when meeting The Queen or a member of the Royal Family, but many people wish to observe the traditional forms.

For men this is a neck bow (from the head only) whilst women do a small curtsy. Other people prefer simply to shake hands in the usual way.

There is no decree, written or otherwise, which would affirm what form of greeting is more appropriate than the other when meeting a member of the royal family because all three are perfectly respectful. Though you'll find some are challenged to accept this. A pointless conquest, but c'est la vie.

Patrimoine canadien - Bienvenue / Canadian Heritage - Welcome

It is up to those meeting The Queen, The Duke of Edinburgh and other members of the Royal Family to choose whether or not they wish to bow/curtsy or simply shake hands.
 
Last edited:
You are completely failing to address the point that the 'choice' of whether or not to bow or curtsey is exactly the same as the 'choice' of whether or not to follow dress code at an event.


Because I think it's a ridiculous comparison not worthy of my time.
 
i`d probably curtsy to the queen and prince phillip and shake hands withe the rest of the BRF. im not sure what i`d do with other countries royalty id only probably recognize the king of spain any way
 
id only probably recognize the king of spain any way

That's interesting. Why only Don Juan Carlos?

To every monarch and their consort I would gladly curtsy. To their heirs and their respective consorts, I would simply shake hands.
 
Last edited:
Ah. Typical response from someone who has no argument.

Find me a person, any person, who has a serious moral objection to white tie.

Like it or not, there are speakably polite people who do not think that it is proper to make a gesture of obeisance to another person. You think that's rude?

Now, if someone has no objection to the concept, but simply doesn't like the royal in question, yes, I would consider that person rude.
 
Last edited:
I think a great deal also depends on where you physically are located - in which or whose country this mythical introduction is being placed.

If I remember correctly, Charles of Wales came to the United States on a visit in the early 1980's. I'd say 1981, but I'll have to look that up. As part of his visit, he flew to California to stay at Sunnylands, the estate of the former US Ambassador to the UK, Walter Annenberg. Annenberg was quite popular during his tenure in the UK, and received an OBE. While in the UK, he and his wife could be known as Sir and Lady Annenberg, which of course had no such effect at home in the US.

When Charles came down the steps of his airplane, he was greeted at the bottom of the stairs by Mrs. Annenberg, who practically fell over herself to throw herself at Charles' feet. In California. Embarrassing for all, really. The papers had quite a field day, printing and reprinting the picture of the wife of the former US Ambassador hurling herself groundward in a curtsey. And reason for the furore was this: in the United States, on US soil, curtseying and bowing are simply not done. Not. Done. Period. We are a Republic, and that is not done.

Mrs. Annenberg bleated that she always curtsied to Charles and the RF when they were visiting England, and the response is yes: that's right. Their country, their customs, their rank, bow/courtesy all you like. This was US soil; no bowing, no curtseying, no titles: stop pretending you're somewhere or someone that you are not.

Back to the recent visit of the French president and his wife. As the wife of a head of state, Carla Bruni is never required to curtsey to a foreign sovereign. That she chose to do so was charming.

Bunny Mellon was the unofficial advisor to Jackie Kennedy during the Kennedy administration, and advised her that, as the wife of a head of state, she did not have to bow to foreign royalty on their soil, although it otherwise might be required.

If I were visiting the King and Queen of Sweden in their summer home - and I need to check the mail tonight to see if my invitation is there or if it was mislaid - it would be my obligation to them as their guest in their country of which they are sovereign to pay appropriate courtesy. If I invited them to our house on the Finger Lakes region of upstate New York for a summer visit, I would not expect to curtsey to them.

I do need to check the mail.
 
Find me a person, any person, who has a serious moral objection to white tie.

Like it or not, there are speakably polite people who do not think that it is proper to make a gesture of obeisance to another person. You think that's rude?

See, the problem is you keep ignoring the fact that a bow/curtsey is (now) simply a sign of respect, and no longer a sign of subservience. But that's fine, it does make your argument rather more compelling when you ignore what the other person is saying.
 
See, the problem is you keep ignoring the fact that a bow/curtsey is (now) simply a sign of respect, and no longer a sign of subservience. But that's fine, it does make your argument rather more compelling when you ignore what the other person is saying.

When did a bow or a curtsey become simply a sign of respect and no longer a sign of subservience? More specifically, when did that statement achieve the rank of "fact"?

And by the way, I'm not sure these royal personages really deserve any more "respect" than any other person. They should be treated with all due respect of a guest or a host, but no more. One person should not have to give up his dignity in order to ingratiate himself to another person, royal or not. And any royal individual that makes judgments about a person who does not bow or curtsey is truly pathetic.
 
Last edited:
See, the problem is you keep ignoring the fact that a bow/curtsey is (now) simply a sign of respect, and no longer a sign of subservience. But that's fine, it does make your argument rather more compelling when you ignore what the other person is saying.

Are you seriously suggesting that people who have a moral objection to making a gesture of obeisance to another person (note: I have no such objections) are saying "I disrespect you" to the royal in question? Maybe if you don't bow, that's what you are doing, but don't presume to speak for everyone when you give the significance of your own personal gestures.

And it isn't necessarily so clear-cut that a bow/curtsy is only a sign of respect.
 
Last edited:
They call it optional so as to avoid the appearance of "you must do this or else". It's roughly as optional as showing up in a t-shirt when white tie is the dress code.

Generally at events where white tie is the dress code, it isn't stated that it's optional.

The royals, the British ones at any rate, don't appear to treat people unfavourably if they don't bow or curtsey. If bowing and curtseying are mandatory, the guidelines on the royal family website shouldn't be saying otherwise. If the royals require people to bow and curtsey but have gone to the trouble of saying they don't, they can't blame people for being confused.
 
that has to be shown!

Has to be shown? I think not. Again, this is no autocracy. I appreciate that you, yourself, may feel it must be observed, but that does not make it obligatory in any way.
 
Back
Top Bottom