The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1321  
Old 10-24-2018, 09:17 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Anderson, United States
Posts: 715
I guess I am the only person on the planet who is disappointed with QEII for giving Kate the RFO. I was hoping she would never get it. Oh well....
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1322  
Old 10-24-2018, 09:33 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 15,835
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdmirerUS View Post
Well, way back in the early married Kate years in this thread, we beat this issue to death. And one of the valid comments from earlier was that Her Majesty does not hand out any order rapidly. Not with the first baby, for sure. Someone that wants the deets can go back and look but it took Sophie quite a while to get hers. Fergie never got one. I forget for sure but think not with Di. And I think Camilla was the fastest from altar to RF order but even then it took a while and maybe was a birthday gift?

And want everyone that told me over and over that ivory was not the issue to admit I was right!

I still really want some royal reporter to find out about the person that still paints these baubles. I want to read THAT story.
Diana got her family order in 81. Some got theirs in the year The Queen came to the throne, 52. Some got it the year of their marriage or just after.

I’m just glad the ivory issue has been solved. If it was up to me, I would replace all the royal ladies and ladies-in-waiting royal orders with glass. Perhaps it’s expensive, but I think it’s worth it.

Now, maybe being a “part time” or “full time” royal plays a part. So that tells me that it’s not going to take a longtime for the newest addition to the family to receive the family order.
__________________

__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
  #1323  
Old 10-24-2018, 11:21 PM
Gretijean's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Austin, United States
Posts: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Marlboro View Post
I guess I am the only person on the planet who is disappointed with QEII for giving Kate the RFO. I was hoping she would never get it. Oh well....
Just curious as to why you believe this... I’m not trying to create hoopla, just interested in you insight.

I would like to see Princess Eugenie get the RFO. She isn’t a full time royal, but she does quite a few charity events and has represented the RF well in her limited capacity.

If Sarah, D of York, remarries Andrew, would she get the RFO?

Are the RFO retuned to the vaults after the death of the recipient?
Reply With Quote
  #1324  
Old 10-24-2018, 11:37 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,765
We have to remember too that there is no set criteria for someone to "earn" the RFO of a monarch. HM could give it to someone in the family because she likes that this person always wears blue, her favorite color or that another person has a love of horses and they can converse for hours on the subject. If Harry and Meghan's child is a daughter, the Queen could give her a RFO at her christening if she so chooses.

Some monarchs have given the RFO to their female members when they were children yet. Some have never gotten one as in the case of Princess Michael of Kent and Sarah, Duchess of York.

To me, its kind of like a Granny matriarch of a family buying and doling out printed t-shirts with the matriarch's portrait on it that she gives to the gals in the family when the mood hits her.

Queen Elizabeth gives these RFOs out in a similar manner. We will never know the reasons or the why the timing or anything related to them as its a personal, family thing and not actually an "award" or significant of merit or diligence to duty or any of those kind of things.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #1325  
Old 10-25-2018, 10:32 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Anderson, United States
Posts: 715
My own personal opinion is that she hasn't done anything to deserve the RFO except maybe popping out 3 kids. I don't think that is a good enough reason. However, as Osipi says, we have absolutely no idea what the Queen's reasons are and never will.
Reply With Quote
  #1326  
Old 10-25-2018, 11:45 PM
Leopoldine's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Marlboro View Post
My own personal opinion is that she hasn't done anything to deserve the RFO except maybe popping out 3 kids. I don't think that is a good enough reason. However, as Osipi says, we have absolutely no idea what the Queen's reasons are and never will.


Well, given the previous generation of Royals and their …. er ....reasons for being in the newspapers, the Duchess of Cambridge's personal discretion and tact are admirable. She is not quotable. She has no quotable pop-culture type quotes that go into the big quote-mill. This is indicative of tremendous personal discipline and bodes well for a future queen consort.
Reply With Quote
  #1327  
Old 10-26-2018, 12:09 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,417
That is admirable if you expect Queen Consorts to be cyphers. Ones like Queen Maxi of the Netherlands and Letizia of Spain and Mary of Denmark aren't.
Reply With Quote
  #1328  
Old 10-26-2018, 01:00 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 773
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Marlboro View Post
My own personal opinion is that she hasn't done anything to deserve the RFO except maybe popping out 3 kids. I don't think that is a good enough reason. However, as Osipi says, we have absolutely no idea what the Queen's reasons are and never will.
Thats my personal opinion as well.
Reply With Quote
  #1329  
Old 10-26-2018, 02:18 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 2,257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Marlboro View Post
My own personal opinion is that she hasn't done anything to deserve the RFO except maybe popping out 3 kids. I don't think that is a good enough reason. However, as Osipi says, we have absolutely no idea what the Queen's reasons are and never will.

1. Show some respect!


2. There are obviously some misunderstandings why orders are being given out. The main thing is not about "deserving" it or "merit", but as a sign of belonging to an institution.
I mean, what royal lady in the past, receiving this particular order in her teens or early twens, has done something specific to deserve it?! No Alexandra of Kent, who got ot being 15, no Prcss. Margaret receiving it as a toddler, and no Diana, receiving the RFO at a time when she, to use your infamous words, "popped out" just one child and has done so far, unlike Catherine, no overseas trips "for Queen and country".


Did the Queen herself "deserve" it as a 10 year old girl only because her father became King? You might say No, I´d say Yes, of course, as she was a royal Princess belonging to this particular Royal Family. So, RFO!

In other monarchies royal family orders are given only because she married a Prince - and is given the most highly and prestigious order (Sweden The Seraphim, Denmark The Elephant tc. all in their ranking comparable to The Garter in Britain, given out only for the most prestigious services to the country and King or Queen or foreign monarchs).


Orders in general (of course there are exceptions) are not to be given because of merit, but because as symbols of belonging, as a sign of diplomatic friendship and bond between the one who gives it and he/ she receiving it. One exception perhaps in Britain is the Most excll. Order of the brit. Empire, given for merits in cultural and society life.
Reply With Quote
  #1330  
Old 10-26-2018, 02:38 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: st. paul, United States
Posts: 1,854
Quote:
Originally Posted by wartenberg7 View Post
1. Show some respect!


2. There are obviously some misunderstandings why orders are being given out. The main thing is not about "deserving" it or "merit", but as a sign of belonging to an institution.
I mean, what royal lady in the past, receiving this particular order in her teens or early twens, has done something specific to deserve it?! No Alexandra of Kent, who got ot being 15, no Prcss. Margaret receiving it as a toddler, and no Diana, receiving the RFO at a time when she, to use your infamous words, "popped out" just one child and has done so far, unlike Catherine, no overseas trips "for Queen and country".
In other monarchies royal family orders are given only because she married a Prince - and is given the most highly and prestigious order (Sweden The Seraphim, Denmark The Elephant tc. all in their ranking comparable to The Garter in Britain, given out only for the most prestigious services to the country and King or Queen or foreign monarchs).


Orders in general (of course there are exceptions) are not to be given because of merit, but because as symbols of belonging, as a sign of diplomatic friendship and bond between the one who gives it and he/ she receiving it. One exception perhaps in Britain is the Most excll. Order of the brit. Empire, given for merits in cultural and society life.
Yes, it's very odd, that poster saw no problem in Diana and Katherine Kent getting RFOs the same year they married but Catherine after six years hasn't earned it? Now I'm wondering what secret magic Diana and Katherine did in just a couple months to 'earn' it. Though Diana and Katherine were/are blue-bloods so maybe they weren't expected to 'earn' it, it was just de jure like with the young Anne, Margaret, and Alexandra.
Reply With Quote
  #1331  
Old 10-26-2018, 04:20 AM
PetticoatLane's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: A Small Town, United Kingdom
Posts: 640
Let's also not forget the absolute absurdity of the Swedish king bestowing an order on his grandchildren as babies at their christenings.

All these orders, whether it be the RFO or the Garter or any other royal order in just about any country, are absurdly irrelevant to modern life in the 21st Century. So, who cares who gets one and when?
Reply With Quote
  #1332  
Old 10-26-2018, 04:56 AM
M. Payton's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 1,850

Question.......Why is it absurd or ridiculous to think that just because it is the 21st century that a person should forgo or get rid of their country's traditions or heritage? I would if I was British be proud that my country carried and preserved those very ideas and traditions that brought forth my country. All those traditions are part of the heart and soul of England and what it is and how it still stands for the British people today....something to be proud of!
Reply With Quote
  #1333  
Old 10-26-2018, 05:53 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Herefordshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,397
Quote:
absurdly irrelevant to modern life in the 21st Century.
Perhaps you believe Monarchies [in general] are thus ?

For the sake of consistency you certainly ought to...!
Reply With Quote
  #1334  
Old 10-26-2018, 06:14 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Somewhere in the U.K, United Kingdom
Posts: 112
If a woman who is part of the BRF through Marriage has received a RFO, in the event of divorce is the RFO withdrawn or does she get to keep it?
Reply With Quote
  #1335  
Old 10-26-2018, 06:53 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: st. paul, United States
Posts: 1,854
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal_enthusiast View Post
If a woman who is part of the BRF through Marriage has received a RFO, in the event of divorce is the RFO withdrawn or does she get to keep it?
I doubt it would be revoked but that divorcee probably wouldn't have gotten any new ones in subsequent reigns, though King William might have given Diana one.

I wonder if George VI had lived longer, at what age he would of given Anne an RFO. Clearly he didn't give it to her as a toddler, but he gave one to Alexandra when she was an underage teen. His father gave them to Elizabeth and Margaret when they were children and they weren't even direct-heir granddaughters like Anne was.
Reply With Quote
  #1336  
Old 10-26-2018, 07:00 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,543
Quote:
Originally Posted by miss whirley View Post
Yes, it's very odd, that poster saw no problem in Diana and Katherine Kent getting RFOs the same year they married but Catherine after six years hasn't earned it? Now I'm wondering what secret magic Diana and Katherine did in just a couple months to 'earn' it. Though Diana and Katherine were/are blue-bloods so maybe they weren't expected to 'earn' it, it was just de jure like with the young Anne, Margaret, and Alexandra.
That's why I don't get Princess Michael not having been given it. She's the ONLY royal lady (forget Meghan for the moment) without it. You'd have thought that after 40 years in the family the Queen could have passed one in her direction. It just seems mean spirited to me and humiliating for the princess.
Reply With Quote
  #1337  
Old 10-26-2018, 07:18 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,417
Beatrice and Eugenie don't have the Royal Family Order. Like Princess Michael they aren't really working royals.
Reply With Quote
  #1338  
Old 10-26-2018, 07:43 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Alexandria, United States
Posts: 423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Beatrice and Eugenie don't have the Royal Family Order. Like Princess Michael they aren't really working royals.
We actually don't know that yet and the Queen may hold the blood members of her family differently than her in-laws. Most of the women at the Commonwealth Dinner didn't wear their RFO's, so that isn't proof to show they don't have it.
Reply With Quote
  #1339  
Old 10-26-2018, 08:07 AM
muriel's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,550
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophie25 View Post
That's why I don't get Princess Michael not having been given it. She's the ONLY royal lady (forget Meghan for the moment) without it. You'd have thought that after 40 years in the family the Queen could have passed one in her direction. It just seems mean spirited to me and humiliating for the princess.
Princess Michael does not carry out engagements on behalf of the BRF. This might explain why.
Reply With Quote
  #1340  
Old 10-26-2018, 08:18 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,765
I guess if some families can have Granny's secret recipes, this royal Granny can have her own secrets that will never be revealed and the rest of the family isn't talking either. We have no clue if the RFO is dependent on being a "working" royal or not. Its a private family thing.

Beatrice and Eugenie may very well have their grandmother's RFO but haven't really had a chance to be somewhere where they'd wear them. The Commonwealth dinner hosted by the Queen was a black tie event and orders are usually only worn at white tie events if memory serves me right.
__________________

__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
orders and decorations, protocol, royal family order


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Popular Tags
america archie mountbatten-windsor asia asian birth britain britannia british royal family camilla camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles carolin china china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing chinese clarence house colorblindness commonwealth countries coronation crown jewels customs daisy doge of venice duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex edward vii elizabeth ii family life family tree fashion and style gemstones george vi gradenigo hello! henry viii highgrove hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs japan japanese imperial family jewellery kensington palace king edward vii książ castle liechtenstein lili mountbatten-windsor line of succession list of rulers medical meghan markle monarchist movements monarchists mongolia nara period pless politics portugal prince harry queen elizabeth ii royal ancestry solomon j solomon spanish royal family suthida thai royal family tradition united states united states of america wales


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:11 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×