Precedence - Who Outranks Who?

[ricarda]

Originally Posted by Spheno

the King of the Netherlands is HRM, the Grand-Duke of Luxembourg is HRH. So the King outranks the Grand-Duke.
But their heirs are HRHs, they have the same style. At this point all depends on "age" of their monarch's ruling.

OK, thanks for the explanation.

[Ish]

Originally Posted by ricarda

There is something wrong in your list. AFAIK Victoria was born in 1977 and is heiress since 1980.

It's not based on when she specifically became the heir, but when the monarch to which she is the heir became monarch.

Carl XVI Gustav became monarch in 1973, so Victoria's precedent is based on that date and not when she actually became the heir.

[tommy100]

personally i'm not convinced. I think its by length of reign and all reiging royals as treated as equals but until we see an event with Albert of Monaco and the king of the Netherlands we won't know for sure.

[NGalitzine]

Well if you think back to wedding of Charles and Diana the guests entered in reverse order of precedence based on date of taking the throne:
1 TSH Princess Grace & Hereditary Prince Albert of Monaco
2 TSH Prince Franz Joseph II and Princess Gina of Liechtenstein (he was then the longest reigning monarch in attendance)
3 TRH Grand Duke Jean and Grand Duchess Josephine Charlotte of Luxembourg
4 HM Queen Beatrix and HRH Prince Claus of The Netherlands (she had just come to the throne in 1980 so was the newest King?Queen of her rank)
Other European monarchs in reverse order of accession with TM King Baudouin and Queen Fabiola being the last to enter in the procession.They exited lead by the Belgians and trailed by the Monagasques.
Courts are of course able to make adjustments as they see fit. QMII orgainzed the protocol alphabetically for a UN meeting in Copenhagen to avoid sitting beside Mugabe of Zimbabwe who was the longest head of state in office in attendance.
Today I think most courts are much more relaxed about these things except perhaps at the most formal state occassions.

[BrazilianEmpire]

Originally Posted by Spheno

11. Hereditary Prince Alois and Hereditary Princess Sophie of Liechtenstein (a heir, Sophie is HRH, from 1989)

But the Hereditary Prince is a Serene Highness, and, as he's the one who matters, they should be seated before all the other heirs.

[Spheno]

Yes, but his wife is HRH.

[NGalitzine]

Originally Posted by Spheno

Yes, but his wife is HRH.

She is an HRH of a non reigning family. Her current precedence is as the wife of the Hereditary Prince of Liechtenstein, a reigning family, while retaining her HRH.

If she was still just an Bavarian HRH she would be seated at events like this with all the deposed monarchs. Look at the film of Frederik & Marys wedding, the deposed royals were seated at a lower level by themselves, not amongst the reignng royals. They even arrived on different buses than the reigning royals.

[Meraude]

Originally Posted by ricarda

Although I once got the explanation that the reason for Queen Elizabeth's notorious absence at other royal houses' festivities is that she would not be seated highest as the royal house of Windsor isn't as old as others - and the British can't have that. According to your theory she actually would be seated highest as she reigns longest.

The Luxembourg couple does not have the same rank as the Danish and Norwegian couples. They would have been seated after them even if the Grand-Duke had ascended to the throne before Queen Margrethe.

Queen Elizabeth is not the longest-serving monarch, she's the second longest-serving, king Bhumibol (Rama IX) is the longest-serving, he became king in 1946, here's a list of the lenght of current reigning monarchs: Current reigning monarchs by length of reign - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As for the rank of monarch and their heirs, well, a monarch is a monarch is a monarch, regardless if they are king/queen, emperor/empress, grand-duke/grand-duchess or prince/princess, Willem-Alexander will be ranked after Albert of Monaco and Henri of Luxembourg in royal ranking, even if his title is king, as he is the newest on the list. The heirs are situated after the length of their parent's reign, what title they have don't matter, only how long their parent have been monarch.

[Marchesina]

Yes, heads of state are all at the same level in terms of protocol (bowing/curtsying) but in terms of ranking, it's the style what matters.
here it is:
SOVEREIGN
Emperor/Emperess (Their Imperial Majesties)
Kings/Queens (Their Majesties)
Gran duke/duchess (Their Royal Highnesses)
Prince/Princess (Their Serene Highnesses)

HEIR
chid of an Emperor/Emperess (His/Her Imperial Highnesses)
child of a King/Queen (His/Her Royal Highness)
child of a Grand duke/duchess (His/Her Royal Highness)
child of a Prince/Princess (His Serene Highness)

in each group there's a specific ranking depending on how long each monarch has been reigning.

as you can see little examples here ROYAL AND NOBLE RANKS -

[BrazilianEmpire]

Originally Posted by Spheno

Yes, but his wife is HRH.

That doesn't matter. The Hereditary Couple were there representing Liechtenstein, not Bavaria. Their precedence derives from Prince Alois' position.

[Warren]

This thread on 'Seating' is about Order of Precedence under another name.
It has therefore been merged into the Precedence thread.

Warren
Admin

[HisLegendaryMajest]

For example, i was a crown prince of Australia (pretend its not in the commonwealth and has nothing to do with the British Royal Family) and i'm getting married. I have to invite all the royal families of the world and most of the world leaders. All of them will be seated based on the time they have been in their position, what would happen if instead of a King or Queen coming they send one of the prince's/princess' (not necessarily a crown prince), do they get seated based on when they personally got their position of prince or when their parents became king or queen?

[Osipi]

I think post #88 in this thread answers your question nicely.

[COUNTESS]

Who out ranks whom.

[HisLegendaryMajest]

Originally Posted by Osipi

I think post #88 in this thread answers your question nicely.

So Prince WIlliam would sit in a position based on where Queen Elizabeth would be based on your belief?

[HisLegendaryMajest]

what happens at an event with both presidents, prime minister, Kings/queens, crown princes/princess' and regular prince's/princess'? Does everyone get seated based on when thy assumed their position out of everyone at the event? or are all the Kings seated, then the presidents/prime minister and then the princes and princess'

[Duc_et_Pair]

The length of the Reign or office is decisive within a same rank. And when exactly equal the name of the country in French will decide.

Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin have exactly the same length of office? President Obama will come before President Putin because alphabetically les États-Unis comes before la (Fédération de) Russie.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by HisLegendaryMajest

what happens at an event with both presidents, prime minister, Kings/queens, crown princes/princess' and regular prince's/princess'? Does everyone get seated based on when thy assumed their position out of everyone at the event? or are all the Kings seated, then the presidents/prime minister and then the princes and princess'

Along with Duc_et_Pair's explanation, it most probably would be easiest to remember that at such an event that you're using as a model, the seating and precedence would be determined by the country rather than rank or titles. So yes, Prince William would be seated as if Queen Elizabeth herself was there as William would be the Queen's official representative at the event.

With this in mind, it would stand to reason that many kings and monarchs or hereditary heads of state would be seated in a more prominent manner because they most likely have been in their positions longer than (for example) a President of the United States because such a president could never have exceeded 8 years as a head of state.

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by NGalitzine

Well if you think back to wedding of Charles and Diana the guests entered in reverse order of precedence based on date of taking the throne:
1 TSH Princess Grace & Hereditary Prince Albert of Monaco
2 TSH Prince Franz Joseph II and Princess Gina of Liechtenstein (he was then the longest reigning monarch in attendance)
3 TRH Grand Duke Jean and Grand Duchess Josephine Charlotte of Luxembourg
4 HM Queen Beatrix and HRH Prince Claus of The Netherlands (she had just come to the throne in 1980 so was the newest King?Queen of her rank)
Other European monarchs in reverse order of accession with TM King Baudouin and Queen Fabiola being the last to enter in the procession.They exited lead by the Belgians and trailed by the Monagasques.
Courts are of course able to make adjustments as they see fit. QMII orgainzed the protocol alphabetically for a UN meeting in Copenhagen to avoid sitting beside Mugabe of Zimbabwe who was the longest head of state in office in attendance.
Today I think most courts are much more relaxed about these things except perhaps at the most formal state occassions.

So let's assume just for the sake of argument that a royal funeral were held in Britain this year. Would president Obama have precedence in the seating over, let's say, King Willem-Alexander, King Philippe, or King Felipe VI as he has been head of state longer than the latter ? I don't think so as monarchs are usually seated together in those occasions and in the front rows.

[Stefan]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

So let's assume just for the sake of argument that a royal funeral were held in Britain this year. Would president Obama have precedence in the seating over, let's say, King Willem-Alexander, King Philippe, or King Felipe VI as he has been head of state longer than the latter ? I don't think so as monarchs are usually seated together in those occasions and in the front rows.

As far as i remember at the funeral of Pope Johhn Paul II. in 2005 where also several Presidents (including President Bush) attended they where seated behind the Kings and Queens.