Precedence - Who Outranks Who?

[PssKatie]

Well William followed The Duke of Edinburgh at the Remembrance Day service last year while Charles was absent. That could just be an exception, but I can't remember any occasion where either Wales boy followed their uncles.

 

[Artemisia]

That makes sense, and thanks for clearing that up. I did read that Zara Phillips has said she always makes sure to curtsey to HM, and I have seen images of Royals curtsying or bowing to her as well, but then HM is a special case.

So, basically Catherine is supposed to curtsey to the Princesses of York if her husband is not there (and VI's versa if he is), and Zara is supposed to curtsey to all of them, but this doesn't typically happen. All are supposed to curtsey to HM, and this does happen. Correct?

On official events (that is, at all events when Official Precedence is implemented), Kate isn't supposed to curtsey to anyone but The Queen, the Duchess of Cornwall and (possibly) The Countess of Wessex. Kate (wife of the Sovereign's grandson) has higher precedence than Beatrice or Eugenie (the Sovereign's granddaughters).

On private events (when Private Precedence is implemented), in addition to the aforementioned Ladies, Kate would also curtsey to Princess Alexandra, Princess Anne, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie.


Zara's place in the Official Order of Precedence comes immediately after Beatrice and Eugenie. That means, in theory, she should curtsey to everyone that comes ahead of her - The Queen, Camilla, Sophie, Kate, Autumn (see below), Beatrice and Eugenie.

I should add that some believe Zara must not be included in the Official Order as she is female-line granddaughter of the Monarch. However, I have found absolutely no notion that only male-line granddaughters are included. The same goes for Autumn (Peter's wife); as wife of the Sovereign's grandson she should be ahead of Beatrice, Eugenie, Louise and Zara - unless she isn't included at all as wife of the female-line grandson.


In practice, British Royals only curtsey to the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh, and very, very rarely (during the most official events) to each other. As I have already mentioned, the whole Order of Precedence business is of more academical than practical interest.

 

[Artemisia]

What would be interesting would be to see how they would enter if Charles wasn't there - would William and Harry then come after Andrew and Edward or still take their precedence based on their father's and their place in the line of succession?

That's an interesting question and one I have been wondering about as well.

The Official Order is very clear: the Sovereign's sons take precedence over the Sovereign's grandsons. However, in recent years we have seen a slight change to that, with William and Harry apparantely taking precedence over their uncles. It may be due to a Private Order (which we don't even know exists), or a permanent change.

William's apparent precedence over the Duke of York during the recent Remembrance Service (when he was not representative his father) may be due to his special position as the Heir's heir. But like you I'd be interested to see the arrival and walking order of the British Royals when Andrew, Edward, William and Harry are present, and Charles isn't.

 

[carlota]

Seating order

i'm interested by the way the royal invitees row (first one on madeleine's side) was arranged at the swedish royal wedding. initially you had obviously the swedish royals, next to them madeleine's godparents. after, it was monaco, the danish, the norwegians, luxembourg, and at the end japan. i'm puzzled by the order given to the monarchies - doesn't protocol dictate that their representants should be arranged by alphabetical order?

 

[ricarda]

They are seated by rank, never by alphabetical order.
Which means that Charlene as the wife of a head of state sits before the heirs.
If they have the same rank they are seated after the "age" of their royal house. So CP Frederik + spouse come before CP Haakon + spouse (Dk being the eldest royal house and Norway the youngest IIRC). Last of the heirs are those of Luxembourg because it is "only" a grand-dukedom, not a kingdom. Japan was last because she is only a representant/princess, not an heir (=lower rank).

If for example country A sends the monarch and the crown prince(ss) and country B only the crown prince(ss) then the cp of country B would be seated higher than the cp of country A, no matter how "old" his royal house is, because he is the highest ranking of country B whereas the highest ranking of country A is the monarch.

 

[carlota]

thanks ricarda, that makes sense.

it was also the order they used to make the guests enter the church, in reverse, obviously.

The entry of the guests of honour into the cathedral - Sveriges Kungahus [NS4 version]

 

[tommy100]

I think the heirs to the thrones are seated according to the date of when their monarch came to the throne thus how long they have been crown prince/heir. The Queen of Denmark came to the throne before the King of Norway so Fredrik and Mary are seated ahead of Haakon and Mette-Marit.
Princess Charlene was seated ahead of the DAnish crown prince/princess as she is the wife of a reining royal. The Luxembourg couple were seated last of the heirs as Grand Duke Henri only succeed to the throne in 2000.
After the crown prince/princesses come the lower down royals by ranking of succession and then the dates their monarchs ascended to their thrones.

 

[Molly2101]

The current heirs were in the front row, with the other family members behind. Edward and Sophie, Marie and Joachim and Marth-Louise and Ari were in the second row as they aren't heirs.

 

[ricarda]

I think the heirs to the thrones are seated according to the date of when their monarch came to the throne thus how long they have been crown prince/heir. The Queen of Denmark came to the throne before the King of Norway so Fredrik and Mary are seated ahead of Haakon and Mette-Marit.
Princess Charlene was seated ahead of the DAnish crown prince/princess as she is the wife of a reining royal. The Luxembourg couple were seated last of the heirs as Grand Duke Henri only succeed to the throne in 2000.
After the crown prince/princesses come the lower down royals by ranking of succession and then the dates their monarchs ascended to their thrones.

You mean it's the duration of the reign of the current monarch and not of the royal house itself which counts. I have never heard that before but it does make sense as well. 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.

 

[tommy100]

Thats how I've always believed it to be organised by length of reign of the current monarch.
I may very well be wrong but I've always believed that the Luxembourg couple have the same rank as other heir to the thrones. Whilst "only a grand duchy" they are still teh heirs to a reining throne. The only way to truly be sure would have been if the new Princess of Orange represented the Netherlands as I beleive she would have been seated as the last of the heirs as the newest, if the luxembourg couple came after her then it would be a sign they are treated differently but I have never seen evidence of that.
Likewise if a Grand Duchy was treated differently then a Principality would be treateddifferently but the Sovereign Princess of Monaco was seated the closest/highest of any royal bar the King, Queen , Crown Princess and Prince Daniel of Sweden and Madeleine's godparents. So clearly she was ranked higher as the wife of a reigining royal regarldess of the fact she is "only" from a principality.

 

[ANNIE_S]

Thats how I've always believed it to be organised by length of reign of the current monarch.

That what I´ve always believed, too. At least it´s the most used standard as far as I know (I think it´s the least controversial, as well).
But I think that each RH established the criteria they find most appropriate for eachh ceremony.

 

[BrazilianEmpire]

I think the order of precedence is something like that:

- Monarchs by the lenght of reign and their styles (Imperial Majesties, Majesties, Royal Highnesses).

- Heirs (I don't know if heirs presumptives can be included) by the lenght of their Monarchs reigns and theirs styles.

- Other Royals (the same criteria used to Heirs).

 

[tommy100]

thats how i think it goes as well.

 

[Spheno]

firstly by theirs styles, secondly the lenght of their Monarchs reigns (in each group)
Dutch inauguration showed it perfectly

 

[ricarda]

I may very well be wrong but I've always believed that the Luxembourg couple have the same rank as other heir to the thrones. Whilst "only a grand duchy" they are still teh heirs to a reining throne. The only way to truly be sure would have been if the new Princess of Orange represented the Netherlands as I beleive she would have been seated as the last of the heirs as the newest, if the luxembourg couple came after her then it would be a sign they are treated differently but I have never seen evidence of that.
Likewise if a Grand Duchy was treated differently then a Principality would be treated differently but the Sovereign Princess of Monaco was seated the closest/highest of any royal bar the King, Queen , Crown Princess and Prince Daniel of Sweden and Madeleine's godparents. So clearly she was ranked higher as the wife of a reigining royal regarldess of the fact she is "only" from a principality.

Guillaume is an heir, but he is Hereditary Grand Duke not Crown Prince. It's a lower rank.
The Sovereign Princess of Monaco was seated highest because she was the only one of the "current monarch"-level present (besides Madeleine's parents). If other monarchs or their wives/husbands had been present she would have been the lowest ranking among them and accordingly less close seated to the family, even behind the Grandduke/duchess of Luxembourg - but still before any heir - just like Albert always has at such events since he became sovereign.

Among the heirs the Luxembourgs are currently the lowest ranking and they will be until Albert&Charlene have an heir.

Regarding the seating of monarchs of equal rank (kings/queens) you might be right though. It might be the duration of their reign which counts and not the "age" of the royal house. I will check that with the Spanish and Luxembourg weddings which I recorded.

 

[Spheno]

You can see royal rank from their style.
Guillaume is HRH, Frederik is HRH, Hookon is HRH.
Albert's heir will be HSH, so he/she will be always lower.

 

[ricarda]

Well, I guess we will have to wait for the next royal event where both the Grand-Duke of Luxembourg and the King of the Netherlands attend, and then see whether WA is seated lower (as the newest monarch) or higher (as king versus grand-duke) than H. I personally think a king ranks higher, regardless of styles.

 

[Spheno]

Seating order at Dutch inauguration (order of precedence)

1. Prince Albert II of Monaco (a monarch)
2. Princess Lalla Salma of Morocco (a wife of monarch, HRH)
3. Sheikha Moza bint Nasser al-Misned (a wife of monarch, HH)
4. Crown Prince Naruhito and Crown Princess Masako of Japan (a heir, HIH, from 1989)
5. Crown Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn & Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn (a heir, HRH, from 1946)
6. The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall (a heir, HRH, from 1952)
7. Crown Prince Billah and Princess Sarah of Brunei (a heir, HRH, from 1967)
8. Crown Prince Frederik and Crown Princess Mary of Denmark (a heir, HRH, from 1972)
9. Crown Princess Victoria and Prince Daniel of Sweden (a heir, HRH, from 1973)
10. The Prince and Princess of Asturias (a heir, HRH, from 1975)
11. Hereditary Prince Alois and Hereditary Princess Sophie of Liechtenstein (a heir, Sophie is HRH, from 1989)
12. Crown Prince Haakon and Crown Princees Mette-Marit of Norway (a heir, HRH, from 1991)
13. Prince Philippe and Princess Mathilde of Belgium (a heir, HRH, from 1993)

 

[Spheno]

Well, I guess we will have to wait for the next royal event where both the Grand-Duke of Luxembourg and the King of the Netherlands attend, and then see whether WA is seated lower (as the newest monarch) or higher (as king versus grand-duke) than H. I personally think a king ranks higher, regardless of styles.

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.

 

[ricarda]

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

 

[ricarda]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.