Order of Precedence 1: Ending 2022

[Osipi]

I just want to point out that Catherine and an official preceded William and official coming down the platform from the train this a.m. in Cambridge. The world did not quit spinning on its axis and William seemed utterly unconcerned. I think precedence is the most knowingly violated royal practice that we talk about in the forums.

If there were red cards and yellow flags for precedence violations by royals on official visits, the poor referees would be worn out.

Actually that is correct precedence. Take a church service for example, the lower you are in precedence, the earlier you enter the church. The Queen is always the last to arrive (unless its a wedding and then she's only followed by the bridal party).

 

[AdmirerUS]

Actually that is correct precedence. Take a church service for example, the lower you are in precedence, the earlier you enter the church. The Queen is always the last to arrive (unless its a wedding and then she's only followed by the bridal party).

As opposed to Camilla, who makes a point of walking behind Charles at public appearances.

Each makes their own rules. There are more exceptions than not - that's all I'm saying.

 

[Artemisia]

As opposed to Camilla, who makes a point of walking behind Charles at public appearances.

Each makes their own rules. There are more exceptions than not - that's all I'm saying.

Arriving and walking are two different things.
During arrivals, royals (usually) arrive in order of seniority - the most senior royals coming last. However, when walking (that is to say, during actual engagements), the less senior royal walks behind the more senior one. Prince Philip, Camilla, Kate and other consorts have all make certain they are a couple of steps behind their spouses.

But I agree the royals are probably much more relaxed about certain things that most of those who are interested in protocol, precedence and all that (me included).

 

[Osipi]

Arriving and walking are two different things.
During arrivals, royals (usually) arrive in order of seniority - the most senior royals coming last. However, when walking (that is to say, during actual engagements), the less senior royal walks behind the more senior one. Prince Philip, Camilla, Kate and other consorts have all make certain they are a couple of steps behind their spouses.

But I agree the royals are probably much more relaxed about certain things that most of those who are interested in protocol, precedence and all that (me included).

And also depending on circumstances too. For example, when Camilla hurt her ankle in a rabbit hole, one engagement saw the PoW pushing his wife in a wheelchair into the venue. One thing I do love seeing with the husbands and wives is the chivalry and protectiveness of their wives.

 

[vkrish]

Hey hey i wanna make a point here. Sometimes the "walking behind" seems to be relaxed for female spouses. It seems ok if they walk ahead of their blood-consorts.
For example..see some videos when they are getting out of car. Usually thr receiving people (hosts) are only at one side when the car arrives. If monarch gets down that side, then its well and good. But what if the consort gets down that side and monarch gets down the other side/from the same side but after the consort?
I have seen in quite a few videos and observed the following:

1. Whenever DoE happend to get down from the 'main door' ie, the host side he just steps aside and waits for the Queen to come from other side, or from the same door, after him. She gets down and greets the hosts. Till then Prince Philip doesnt smile or even look into the eye of the receiving party, though he is really near to them. latest example is when they arrived at Abbey for royal wedding.

2. But see Queen Mother, and even Queen Mary in their own old videos, if they happend to get down the hosts' side they never waited for their Kings to get down. They simply went ahead to be greeted by their hosts and started chatting. For a couple of minutes it will seem as if the Kings are following the Queens.
It is not a dangerous, though definitely a breach of protocol, but its ok since ladies are always entitled to walk ahead of gentlemen

Did this make any sense to you guys..Wat do u say

 

[Rocketmom]

Branchg,....?? Do not be ignorant!

Gosh, that was pretty rude.. I sincerely hope this forum doesn't become like some of the political discussion forums where people are insulting and nasty. I've been having so much fun learning from this site.

 

[Kataryn]

2. But see Queen Mother, and even Queen Mary in their own old videos, if they happend to get down the hosts' side they never waited for their Kings to get down. They simply went ahead to be greeted by their hosts and started chatting. For a couple of minutes it will seem as if the Kings are following the Queens.
It is not a dangerous, though definitely a breach of protocol, but its ok since ladies are always entitled to walk ahead of gentlemen

Did this make any sense to you guys..Wat do u say

But then women take their husband's rank and become their equal on marriage. Thus a queen consorts in rank equals her husband and as a lady she has certain advantages, for a lady never needs to wait for a gentleman in situations like that. With the Duke it is different because he is not his wife's equal in rank. So his wife is both the lady and the superior.

 

[Rocketmom]

Ok, I can understand the need for order during public events like going to church for the Jubilee celebration. However, for private church going like Christmas at Sandringham, It is supposed to be a family service (even though the public awaits their arrival and departure). In that case, it just seems down right petty to insist that they march in order . Kind of reminds me of all the little kindergarten students lined up to march into their school room

 

[VictoriaB]

Ok, I can understand the need for order during public events like going to church for the Jubilee celebration. However, for private church going like Christmas at Sandringham, It is supposed to be a family service (even though the public awaits their arrival and departure). In that case, it just seems down right petty to insist that they march in order . Kind of reminds me of all the little kindergarten students lined up to march into their school room

They don't march in order going to church. Look at the pictures.

 

[Rocketmom]

While re-watching William and Kate's wedding, I noticed that the Kents and Glouchesters were seated in row 3 while Peter and Zara were in row 4. They come before the Kents etc in the succession. Are the Kent's seated in a earlier row due to age?

 

[Osipi]

While re-watching William and Kate's wedding, I noticed that the Kents and Glouchesters were seated in row 3 while Peter and Zara were in row 4. They come before the Kents etc in the succession. Are the Kent's seated in a earlier row due to age?

My first off the wall guesstimate is that they were seated in front of Peter and Zara because they hold the title HRH and Anne's children do not.

 

[MarleneKoenig]

It would have been difficult for Louise's children to be in the order of precedence ... she did not have any children.

That's an interesting question.

The Order of Precedence puts Sovereign's granddaughters immediately after the wives of Sovereign's grandsons; there is no mention that they should be Royal Highnesses or have titles of any sorts. Zara and Louise are the Queen's granddaughters - ergo, they should be included.

When Queen Victoria's daughter married a non-royal (a pretty daring move in those times) - the Duke of Argyll - that didn't mean her children were crossed out from the Order of Precedence. I would assume the same applies to the Queen's non-titled grandchildren. For the same reason, I have included Autumn Phillips (wife of the Sovereign's grandson), Viscountess Linley (the wife of the Sovereign's nephew), and others.

 

[Artemisia]

True, my mistake.

 

[Princess B]

I know how the order of precedence normally works.
When only women are in the room, princesses of blood take precedence over princess' by marriage.

Also when a husband of one of the princess' by marriage enters he takes her husbands precedence. Is it applicable to all in the room or only that princess whose husband is in the room?

For instance the York sisters, Kate and Camilla are in a room. Under normal circumstances the Yorks take precedence but if William enters Kate will take his precedence and outrank Eugenie and Beatrice. Will Camilla also take on her husbands precedence or will Kate outrank her?

 

[Artemisia]

...
For instance the York sisters, Kate and Camilla are in a room. Under normal circumstances the Yorks take precedence but if William enters Kate will take his precedence and outrank Eugenie and Beatrice. Will Camilla also take on her husbands precedence or will Kate outrank her?

Firstly, we must again remember the difference between the Official and Private Orders of Precedence. It is only in the Private Order that the blood Princesses outrank Princesses by marriage. In the Official Order of Precedence, as the Duchess of Cornwall (wife of the Heir Apparent) Camilla is the second woman in the Kingdom after the Queen. In the Private Order, Camilla comes only after Princess Anne and Alexandra (Princesses by birth of the older generation) but above everyone else. Kate comes after the Princesses by birth of the younger generation (Beatrice and Eugenie) in the Private Order of Precedence but ahead them in the Official one.

In the scenario you mentioned, if the York sisters, Kate and Camilla are present then regardless of William and Charles' presence Camilla automatically outranks all three. Kate comes ahead of the York sisters in the Official Order (as wife of the Sovereign's grandson) but below them in the Private Order.

 

[Princess B]

Thank u artemisia

 

[Dman]

We also have to remember that Camilla & Catherine are the second and third ladies of the land. So they are both high ranking ladies.

 

[Artemisia]

That's not entirely true.
In the Official Order of Precedence, the Duchesses are the 2nd (Camilla) and the 4th (Kate) ladies in the Kingdom.

Kate, as wife of the Sovereign's grandson, comes after Sophie - wife of the Sovereign's son. In the Private Order, Camilla and Kate come respectively 4th and 8th (Camilla is after the Queen, Princess Anne and Princess Alexandra, while Kate is after the Queen, Anne, Alexandra, Camilla, Sophie, Beatrice and Eugenie).

 

[Dman]

That's not entirely true.
In the Official Order of Precedence, the Duchesses are the 2nd (Camilla) and the 4th (Kate) ladies in the Kingdom.

Kate, as wife of the Sovereign's grandson, comes after Sophie - wife of the Sovereign's son. In the Private Order, Camilla and Kate come respectively 4th and 8th (Camilla is after the Queen, Princess Anne and Princess Alexandra, while Kate is after the Queen, Anne, Alexandra, Camilla, Sophie, Beatrice and Eugenie).

Yeah, that may be for the set Order of Precedence but the two main ladies you see following The Queen at public events are Camilla and Catherine.

 

[Artemisia]

No arguments there.
Although it may just be a question of simple convenience; the Wales family usually arrives and leaves together.

 

[NGalitzine]

I don't think the BRF is as hung up on formal precedence as some members of these forums. I recall the Master of the Household giving an interview at the time of the 2011 wedding and him saying the palace gets regular calls asking for a copy of the official protocol book and his response is always that no such book exists, that protocol is just a question of good manners and what is practical for each event.

 

[Artemisia]

Obviously, most of what is discussed in this particular thread has more of an academical than practical purpose. I doubt the Countess of Wessex throws a tantrum every time the Duchess of Cambridge is perceived to outrank her, or Prince Andrew refuses to talk to his mother because William and Harry appear to have precedence over him, even if unofficially.

It's still fun and interesting to understand how the precedence is supposed to work though. Well, it is for me and presumably to you as well since you have made many interesting posts here.

 

[Dman]

I don't think the BRF is as hung up on formal precedence as some members of these forums. I recall the Master of the Household giving an interview at the time of the 2011 wedding and him saying the palace gets regular calls asking for a copy of the official protocol book and his response is always that no such book exists, that protocol is just a question of good manners and what is practical for each event.

Yeah, I think you are talking about Sir Malcolm Ross. I remember his commentary.

I think The Queen made things pretty clear during her Diamond Jubliee events. Camilla & Catherine were the main two ladies she brought some attention to.

Artemisia, understanding the Order of Precedence can be fun and confusing at the sametime. I know the palace must get tired of all those precdence questions.

 

[Molly2101]

I really don't think we ever see true precedence in this family, and that doesn't really bother me. We have always seen Charles' son's walk after him as the family leave occasions, and of course now we see Camilla and Catherine walking with their husbands.

Sophie is the 3rd lady "in the land" as she is the wife of the Sovereign's son, but Beatrice and Eugenie always walk before her with their father. The family now just seems to walk in older of succession, as opposed to precedence. There will come a time when Louise wont walk with Edward, but instead she will walk behind Anne but ahead of Peter and Zara as Louise is not an HRH (legally yes, but it's not used as we know).

I don't think we will ever see a situation where it is just the women of the Royals together at an engagement. I say women and include Sophie in this. We have of course see the Queen, Camilla and Catherine attend an engagement together, but never all the "leading women" in the family together. I do however remember watching a video of the women at an engagement at Buckingham Palace in February 2007 for "Women in Business" and Anne came before Camilla, followed by Sophie and Birgitte. Alexandra was not there, but I would imagine she would have come before/after Anne.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Firstly, we must again remember the difference between the Official and Private Orders of Precedence. It is only in the Private Order that the blood Princesses outrank Princesses by marriage. In the Official Order of Precedence, as the Duchess of Cornwall (wife of the Heir Apparent) Camilla is the second woman in the Kingdom after the Queen. In the Private Order, Camilla comes only after Princess Anne and Alexandra (Princesses by birth of the older generation) but above everyone else. Kate comes after the Princesses by birth of the younger generation (Beatrice and Eugenie) in the Private Order of Precedence but ahead them in the Official one.

Where have you seen this?

I have only seen reference to blood princesses coming before married in princesses in private precedence with no mention of generations - so Beatrice and Eugenie also before Camilla as blood princesses.

Of course this is only in private when the only people present are the women of the royal family and we never ever see them in private.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I know how the order of precedence normally works.
When only women are in the room, princesses of blood take precedence over princess' by marriage.

Also when a husband of one of the princess' by marriage enters he takes her husbands precedence. Is it applicable to all in the room or only that princess whose husband is in the room?

For instance the York sisters, Kate and Camilla are in a room. Under normal circumstances the Yorks take precedence but if William enters Kate will take his precedence and outrank Eugenie and Beatrice. Will Camilla also take on her husbands precedence or will Kate outrank her?

The precedence you are referring to is the private precedence for royal women when they are alone.

As soon as any man is present that precedence goes out the window so then all women take their precedence according to the private precedence of the men and women combined.

 

[Iluvbertie]

We have this private precedence for women but we have never seen one for men.

When it is only the men of the extended family where does say Tim Lawrence fit - behind the Dukes of Gloucester and Kent and David Linley or ...

Do the men have something similar? It has never been announced to my knowledge.

I know that when in mixed company Tim would take precedence alongside Anne just as the wives take the precedence of their husbands but when it is just the men??

 

[Artemisia]

Where have you seen this?

I have only seen reference to blood princesses coming before married in princesses in private precedence with no mention of generations - so Beatrice and Eugenie also before Camilla as blood princesses.

Of course this is only in private when the only people present are the women of the royal family and we never ever see them in private.

I admit that assumption of mine is based on information provided by branchg (see the post). I myself haven't seen that confirmation from the Palace. However, that scenario would make sense so I am inclined to believe it.

In regards to Camilla's position, I have seen confirmation from the Palace that she only comes after two blood Princesses - Alexandra and Anne - but ahead of Beatrice and Eugenie.

We have this private precedence for women but we have never seen one for men.

When it is only the men of the extended family where does say Tim Lawrence fit - behind the Dukes of Gloucester and Kent and David Linley or ...

Do the men have something similar? It has never been announced to my knowledge.

I know that when in mixed company Tim would take precedence alongside Anne just as the wives take the precedence of their husbands but when it is just the men??

I think we can be fairly certain some sort of Private Precedence does exist for men as well. Among other things, William and Harry appear to occasional outrank Andrew and Edward which is not consistent with the Official Order of Precedence.

In regards to Tim, if he is includes in the Private Order of Precedence at all then he most likely takes his precedence from his wife, meaning he should come ahead of the Gloucesters and Kents. Then again, the order may be based on the principle of royal blood (those who were born royal come first), in which case we would come after Prince Richard and Prince Edward.

I'd say the Private Order of Precedence goes like this:
- The Duke of Edinburgh
- The Prince of Wales
- The Duke of Cambridge
- Prince Henry of Wales
- The Duke of York
- The Earl of Wessex *
- The Duke of Gloucester
- The Duke of Kent
- Timothy Lawrence

* Viscount Severn is not included because he is not of age yet

 

[Iluvbertie]

I admit that assumption of mine is based on information provided by branchg (see the post). I myself haven't seen that confirmation from the Palace. However, that scenario would make sense so I am inclined to believe it.

In regards to Camilla's position, I have seen confirmation from the Palace that she only comes after two blood Princesses - Alexandra and Anne - but ahead of Beatrice and Eugenie.

Where have you seen this confirmation? I found it strange that you have seen this when the palace hasn't confirmed anything about this at all - it has only been reported by 'palaces sources' but not by an official palace spokesperson.

 

[vkrish]

This is only about Ladies' Precedence
1.Though there is no specific confirmation or statement, the "list" clearly indicates that blood princesses outrank those of marriage, only of their generation, or younger, but never of older generation.
Beatrice and Eugenie will never outrank Camilla/Sophie. Only Anne outranks the latter two. Beatrice, Eugenie and Louise will outrank wives of William and Harry in present reign, but I doubt that will happen in the next reign.
2.Regd. position of Princess Alexandra in Ladies' Precedence
Actually, if the list was strictly made, Princess Alexandra should have been placed after all the immediate royal family.
It should be like this:
After the ladies of George VI family,
1.Alexandra of Kent
2.Duchess of Gloucester
3.Duchess of Kent
4.Marie-Christine
5.Gloucester daughters, Kent daughters, ALexandra's daughter.
6.Daughters in law..AS ABOVE order.
This was Alexandra's rightful place, but they took her right next to Queen and Anne. Of course she was the granddaughter of monarch, but so are Bea, Eu and Louise, and they are grand-daughters of present sovereign.
This is the only case where they have taken generations into consideration and placed ALexandra ahead of all Queen's grand-daughters.
But in that case she should be placed even ahead of Anne, since she is of the Queen's generation. Although I secretly feel this was to make Anne look less of a villain, all the talk of her refusing to be below Camilla, leading up this whole thing. Lot of ambiguity and lack of clarity in this list.
I am never a fan of this whole thing.
Its either to convince public public that Camilla was not 'overjoyously welcome' or to placate Anne's ego.
Whatever, the Queen was poorly 'advised' in this matter, I feel.
The BRF does evrything else so systematically, and this is a big exception.
The very creation and motive of Ladies Precedence seems to be a mess, and it becomes much more messier, once we take it beyond the immediate RF.