Order of Precedence 1: Ending 2022

[Lumutqueen]

If you by Sovereign mean queen Elizabeth, the princess Alice could impossibly be her great-niece, as she was a grandchild of queen Victoria!

If you read the post in full Artemisia says

Of course, as the longest-living British Princess by blood and Queen Victoria's last surviving grandchild, Alice was always given a rank and precedence that were much higher, but that was only a mark of respect.

Elizabeth was Alice's great niece.

 

[Artemisia]

If you by Sovereign mean queen Elizabeth, the princess Alice could impossibly be her great-niece, as she was a grandchild of queen Victoria!

I apologise for the error of wording in my post; Queen Elizabeth was Princess Alice's great niece, not the other way round.

If you read the post in full Artemisia says...
Elizabeth was Alice's great niece.

I must not make any more late-night posts; I always manage to make a typo of some sort in them.

 

[EIIR]

...I've never seen an HRH member of the BRF to curtsy to another HRH member of the BRF, not even to Prince Philip!

At Trooping the Colour recently, the Duchess of Cambridge was seen curtseying to the DoE on the balcony. Both are HRH.

 

[Artemisia]

Regarding curtsying, I think it is pretty simple : RH curtsies to HM! [/QUOTE] I would agree with you that by and large, that's the simplified version of precedence and rank the royals these days seem to go by.

However, the actual precedence and rank rules are not, by any means, that simple. Royal Highnesses do curtsey to each other in certain circumstances (mainly, state or very official events). For instance, the Duchesses of Cornwall and Cambridge both curtsied to Prince Philip, the Duchess of Cambridge curtseyed to the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester, etc.

As for Royal Highness curtseying to Majesty - it's not quite as simple as that. For instance. Henri, Grand Duke of Luxembourg is a Royal Highness, but as a Sovereign (Head of State), he is not obliged to bow to any Monarch, whether Royal or Imperial Majesty.

 

[andrew]

.

You're right, maybe I've simplified it too much!
However I've never seen any pictures or footage of it. Can you post some, please?

 

[kbk]

texankitcat, NGalitzine, branchg --> just remember the fact that the official Order of Precedence and the private Order of Precedence at court are not the same and the last one is, as texankitcat said, at the discretion of the monarch. What I am trying to persuade you of is that by the "state" precedence, used at official occassions, the Duke of Windsor's position was higher than that of his two youngest brothers. Just because he was older and his abdication did not change that.
I think the Queen Mary memorial event you are reffering to was not a state occassion. And it seems that Edward and Wallis were placed at this private, courte event after Henry and his wife, so the private precedence was differentiated from the "official" one. By the way, where indeed was the Dowager Duchess of Kent? Where exactly she was placed in the group and what does it tell us about her precedence?

As the Sovereign's great-aunt, her precedence was below the ladies I mentioned, and then some (including wives of the Queen's other unles, and her other aunts by laws of primogeniture).

What uncles and what aunts exactly did you mean?

Her position would have been about 18th in the precedence list of 1980.
Of course, as the longest-living British Princess by blood and Queen Victoria's last surviving grandchild, Alice was always given a rank and precedence that were much higher, but that was only a mark of respect.

That's really an interesting case, because she was a Princess by birth and a granddaughter of a former Sovereign so her position in the Royal Family and the monarchy at all was unquestionable but the order of precedence is based on direct relations to the current Sovereign and not his or her precedessors. So I think you're right, Artemisia. Princess Alice was the last Royal in the order of precedence, after Princess Alexandra.

 

[Artemisia]

What uncles and what aunts exactly did you mean?

I actually meant the likes of Princess Alexandra, Duchess of Fife (wife of Prince Arthur of Connaught) and Princess Patricia of Connaught - completely forgetting we were talking about precedence for the year 1980 (when most of them were, unfortunately, dead). If you'd like, I can check the living ladies of the time who would have been ahead of Princess Alice, Countess of Athlone.

That's really an interesting case, because she was a Princess by birth and a granddaughter of a former Sovereign so her position in the Royal Family and the monarchy at all was unquestionable but the order of precedence is based on direct relations to the current Sovereign and not his or her predecessors. So I think you're right, Artemisia. Princess Alice was the last Royal in the order of precedence, after Princess Alexandra.

Relation to former Sovereigns doesn't really matter - only degree of kinship to the current one does.
For instance, right now the Countess of Wessex (as the wife of the Sovereign's son) outranks the Duchess of Cambridge.
However, once Charles becomes King, Kate will outrank Sophie (who would, at that point, be only the wife of the Sovereign's brother).

 

[Artemisia]

You're right, maybe I've simplified it too much!
However I've never seen any pictures or footage of it. Can you post some, please?

I hope someone else will help you finding a pictures of Camilla, Sophie and other royal ladies curtseying to Prince Philip; I've seen them do it, but cannot find pictures at the moment. However, below is a footage from Trooping the Colour ceremony where Kate curtseys to Prince Philip (at about 44:58).
Trooping the Colour - Part 3/3 - June 2012 - YouTube

 

[branchg]

What I am trying to persuade you of is that by the "state" precedence, used at official occassions, the Duke of Windsor's position was higher than that of his two youngest brothers. Just because he was older and his abdication did not change that.
I think the Queen Mary memorial event you are reffering to was not a state occassion.

The Duke of Windsor only attended one state occasion after his abdication and that was his brother's funeral in 1952. He walked behind his brother's coffin together with his nephew, The Duke of Kent, and his brother, The Duke of Gloucester, so that would indicate he was granted appropriate, but not superior precedence.

The unveiling of the memorial to Queen Mary at Marlborough House in 1967 was a royal occasion. Again, The Duke, for the first time accompanied publicly by The Duchess, took appropriate precedence after The Duke and Duchess of Gloucester, The Queen Mother, The Queen and Prince Philip, but before everyone else.

Princess Marina was battling cancer by then and did not attend, although she hosted a lunch for The Duke and Duchess at Kensington Palace after the ceremony with her family as the Windsors were not invited to lunch with the royal family at Windsor Castle.

 

[Iluvbertie]

He attended his mother's funeral, which was also a state occasion and rode in a line with Philip, Henry and Edward (Dukes of Edinburgh, Gloucester and Kent respectively)

 

[LadyoftheLake]

The only reason the media is making such a big deal is due to their infatuation with Kate. The media wants to toss Order out the window because it is Kate. True Kate may be queen one day, but right now she is just a Duchess.
I think similar noise was made over Diana having to curtsey to Anne, Alexandra etc. Nothing has been made of Camilla having to curtsey if Charles is not with her.

No idea if someone has mentioned this before but I smell Prince Andew's hand in this (at least being behind the press getting wind of the new order). I truly think it irritates him no end that the press have a field day with his daughters and their dress and yet a new non-royal by birth now royal upstart is held in such high regard. This feeling is reinforced by the fact he pushed to have his daughters retain their princess status when all others in the family have shied away from that (at least presently).

My 2 cents worth.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I don't see Andrew in this at all.

It was forecast before Kate and William married in this article dated 30th November, 2010 shortly after the engagement Kate Middleton: Will Camilla have to curtsey to wife of future king? | Mail Online
and simply follows on from the updated order issued in 2005 to take account of the inclusion of Kate and the coming of age of Beatrice and Eugenie.

 

[Mirabel]

No idea if someone has mentioned this before but I smell Prince Andew's hand in this...

I agree!
I don't think for one minute that Andrew has given up on having his daughters become part of the Firm.

They are in the press constantly these days, at both royal and private events, dressed in designer clothing and posing for pictures. And I think it is starting to pay off; they both have a higher profile than previously, thanks to all the media coverage. JMO.

 

[Nico]

Princess Marina was battling cancer by then and did not attend, although she hosted a lunch for The Duke and Duchess at Kensington Palace after the ceremony with her family as the Windsors were not invited to lunch with the royal family at Windsor Castle.

Princess Marina was definitively at the event, as you can see here :

UNVEILING QUEEN MARY PLAQUE - Technicolor - British Pathé

On the precedence matter, this video is indeed quite interesting, notably about the Windsors presence (and maybe about the fact that the Duchess of Windsor didn't curtsey to the Queen Mother ahem).

 

[branchg]

Great catch! I had read Marina did not attend, but obviously she did.

Yes, the non-curtsey by The Duchess to The Queen Mother was duly noted by many of the newspapers that day. Later, a friend supposedly asked Wallis about it and she stated "she stopped people from curtseying to me, so why should I curtsey to her?"

 

[Iluvbertie]

...They are in the press constantly these days...

Is it possible that they are in the press because they are in their early 20s and so are now out and about now more than they were in their teenage years.

I don't see this as push for them to be in the firm but rather that they were always going to get this coverage at this stage of their lives - simply because of their ages and who they are.

 

[Lee27]

US Media reports Kate is dissed & demoted by Queen

On Yahoo.com there is a media article from Hollywood Lite that describes the Order of Precedence as the Queen putting Kate in her place.


The following is the first part of the article


Poor Kate! The Queen is furious that the popular Royal newlywed is stealing HER spotlight and she’s out to remind her that she’s not a born Royal – so there! Here’s what she’s done!
Kate Middleton – don’t outshine Queen Elizabeth! That’s what Kate is finding out the hard way after her husband Prince William‘s grandmother just gave her the Royal equivalent of a smackdown!
Just after the Queen’s Royal Jubilee celebrating her 60 years on the throne, Elizabeth II issued an official revision of The Royal Household Order of Precedence and Kate, 30 is now required to curtsy to Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson‘s two daughters, Princess Beatrice, 23, and Princess Eugenia, 22.

*********************

So Kate has to curtsey. In a few years, they will be curtseying to her.

I do not think it is an indication that the Queen does not Like Kate. I think from all visual evidence and comments by Prince William, The Queen does like Kate. And since there have been no stories about Kate under going rigorous training to eventually be Queen, the powers that bee seen pleased with her.

 

[branchg]

Catherine is not going to curtsey to anyone but The Queen and Prince Philip, the same as the rest of the family. HRH does not curtsey to HRH anymore regardless of their precedence at court.

 

[Artemisia]

Well, Kate did curtsey to every single Royal Highness above her in rank (and some, equal or below) she met during the Lunch with Monarchs. I also find it extremely unlikely she will not curtsey to Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall during official and/or state events.

 

[VictoriaB]

Well, Kate did curtsey to every single Royal Highness above her in rank (and some, equal or below) she met during the Lunch with Monarchs. I also find it extremely unlikely she will not curtsey to Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall during official and/or state events.

But did she choose to do it or was she required by protocol to do it?

My understanding was always that HRHs are equal and curtseys are only required to HMs although I understand why Prince Philip's position would be different to other HRHs.

 

[Iluvbertie]

There have been reports for nearly 30 years that Anne has refused to curtsey first to Diana and now to Camilla - now after their marriages Diana and Camilla were/are also HRHs as is Anne but she has simply refused to curtsey to them.

That is a clear indication that they do curtsey/bow to each other, even in private.

If you think about it - if they don't observe the differences between themselves there really is no point in having them as there is no need for anyone else to do say.

 

[NGalitzine]

In one of Robert Golden's articles at the back of Majest magazine he mentions a newly married into member of the royal family complaining that another member of the royal family not curtseying to her and the comment from her husband was "of course not, she is family".

 

[miche]

During the Thames Pageant the only people that all the HRH curtsy and bow to was The Queen and Prince Philip

 

[Iluvbertie]

We must remember that they also see each other before these events begin in many cases so the curtseying is done in private not public.

Of course when the Queen is present then everyone curtseys/bows to her so they don't then curtsey to others lower in the pecking order.

 

[NGalitzine]

I don't think the Monarchs lunch is much of a guide since many of the guests were curtseying to people they clearly did not have to. Perhaps because such gatherings are so rare, especially in the UK, people just started bobbing and nodding to everyone they met.

I still believe that the Order of Precedence is used for the purpose of seating plans and order of entry to state occassions. I find it very hard to believe that HRHs would have to curtsey to each other privately or even at official events. Prince Philip being the exception due to his position as consort and also his great age and the respect he is held in.

 

[Osipi]

I still believe that the Order of Precedence is used for the purpose of seating plans and order of entry to state occassions. I find it very hard to believe that HRHs would have to curtsey to each other privately or even at official events. Prince Philip being the exception due to his position as consort and also his great age and the respect he is held in.

IIRC, private occasions would be formal dinners at Balmoral where everything is perfectly timed with all the royals entering the dining room by the order of precedence. Another such occasion would be the Ghillies' Ball that the Queen hosts every year at Balmoral. I would think that during formal private occasions, strict protocol would be followed but perhaps not so much at one of Philip's famous BBQ's.

 

[Osipi]

In one of Robert Golden's articles at the back of Majest magazine he mentions a newly married into member of the royal family complaining that another member of the royal family not curtseying to her and the comment from her husband was "of course not, she is family".

To be honest, I can't for the life of me think of who the newly married member of the royal family could possibly be. It really doesn't strike me as Kate's nature to be bothered by a non-curtsey in the least. When an article alludes to "someone", the chances are very likely that the story is fictional.

 

[PrincePat10]

The Curtsy Controversy

I wanted to get some input on whether The duchess of Cambridge truly must curtsy to William's cousins in private.

I'm aware that The Duchess is not a princess of the blood or a princess in her own right, but she technically is "Princess" William of of Wales, the wife of the The UK's future King.

However, I guess since the current Monarch writes the order of Precedence there I'd only do much that can be said.

I always admired Her Majesty the Queen since I was 12 years old for her decorum. I hope this is not as it seems.

 

[dbarn67]

I have no problem with the Order of Precedence that Her Majesty has set forth. Just because the Duchess of Cambridge is the popular gal of the moment doesn't mean she should leapfrog over the Queen's rules. I, for one, think it's right that blood princesses have a slight advantage over someone who's married into the role of princesses. I have enormous respect for Princess Anne, and, as she's a blood princess I think she should have a higher advantage of the Camilla, Sophie and now Catherine. Beatrice and Eugenie shouldn't be subject to a different set of standard just because they're not a popular as Catherine or as active in the royal work world as the Princess Royal.

 

[Tsar bobo Iv]

but she is the mother to the future heir to the throne