The Royal Family Order (RFO) and other Royal Orders and Decorations 1: Ending 2022


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I find the RFO pretty discutable. Either you give all Princesses of the House an Order (á la Norway and Sweden) or you do not give any such Order at all. But to leave it all "at the Queen's pleasure" and keeping it absolutely unclear who, when, where and why a lady receives such an Order or not, this is just divisive inside a family and is absurd.

When the rule is that daughers (in law) of a Sovereign or a Heir all receive the Family Order, then it is clear. But all this misty doing-and-not-doing is unworthy towards the ladies in question because it derails into a sort "competition" and into "first rank and second rank"-ladies which is absurd for 2015.

I hope King Charles III or King William V will review this strange system.
I kind of agree with you. Even though I see why they do as they do. They do it so that it really is given because they are thought to deserve it and want to give it. But it does open up for alot of unneccessary speculation. Especially since it's a Royal Family Order, making it feel like that is a "welcome to the family"-thing. I hope it can be handled more delicatly in the future to avoid pitting royals agains each other, or at least with some more transperancy.
 
I kind of agree with you. Even though I see why they do as they do. They do it so that it really is given because they are thought to deserve it and want to give it. But it does open up for alot of unneccessary speculation. Especially since it's a Royal Family Order, making it feel like that is a "welcome to the family"-thing. I hope it can be handled more delicatly in the future to avoid pitting royals agains each other, or at least with some more transperancy.

I don't think the royals go against each other over this kind of thing, but it leads to a great deal of speculation for the media and royal watchers.

Some good time has passed for Catherine though, and she should at least have the family Order for the upcoming Diplomatic Corps Reception or the next State Visit in the spring.
 
This probably won't help, but it could be a generational thing where by only female daughters/daughter's-in-law of the Monarch and royal-born females of the next generation below the Monarch receive it.
If this theory is correct Catherine may not get the RFO until Charles is king and he may also bestow the order onto Beatrice and Eugenie too.
 
Jack,
I am not sure if your theory works as Princesses Elizabeth and Margaret received their Grandfatrher's RFO (George V) when they were quite young in 1935
 
There isn't any set rules. It's not like you have to do so many years of the official duties and then they give to you. The Queen and Margaret got a RFO from their grandfather as small children. They weren't doing anything to earn them. It just up to the monarch of the day to decide.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

IMO Queen Elizabeth has made the whole RFO thing unnecessarily complicated. In the past it simply denoted that the lady in question was a member of the royal family and that was it. When a lady entered the British royal family she was given it straight away. Princess Marina of Greece, for example, actually wore the Order of her father in law, King George V, on her wedding dress. His other daughters in law didn't but also received it straight away. Similarly, female royal children received the Order of the Monarch they lived under and would wear that Order in adulthood along with the Order of the current Monarch. Thus we had Princess Margaret wearing George V's; her father George VI's and her sister's Order all at the same time. Princess Alexandra of Kent also wears the George VI Order along with the current Queen's even though she was only a child when she received them. The media also keep saying that so-called 'senior' royal ladies have the RFO when all of them except Kate and Princess Michael have it so that's more poor reporting but I am going off point. Basically the Queen has made the whole issue complicated when it never was before. If it is all to do with 'hard work' then she has not only introduced criteria for receiving it that was never there before but she's also changed her own rules considering that she awarded it to her 16 year old cousin who was still a school girl at the time.
 
Last edited:
Jack,
I am not sure if your theory works as Princesses Elizabeth and Margaret received their Grandfatrher's RFO (George V) when they were quite young in 1935

I knew my theory it wouldn't help!

From what Angela has said in the previous post, there seems to be no set rules these days about the RFO and it is at the Queen's own discretion - how she decides is anyone's guess.
 
I don't think the royals go against each other over this kind of thing, but it leads to a great deal of speculation for the media and royal watchers.

Some good time has passed for Catherine though, and she should at least have the family Order for the upcoming Diplomatic Corps Reception or the next State Visit in the spring.
Yes, I didn't mean between the royals (although the possibility COULD arise). But it seems like a non-clever PR thing. The royal family has it's best PR when it looks like a loving and tight knit family. And this waiting and speculating of the family order puts some strain on that "narrative".
 
Historically the RFO has just been a pretty buable for female Royals to wear at evening events and I don't know why it hasn't been left at that by the present Queen.The Royal Victorian Order is the vehicle by which the Monarch of the day has always rewarded service to the Royal Family among both her family and staff so,as I already said, I don't understand why the RFO has been drawn into this.
 
From the informative post by Angela I understand that the RFO had the same mechanism as the similar Orders in Norway and Sweden: you get one as a Princess of the Royal House.

When we look to Norway: all royal Princesses have the family Order. When we look to Sweden: also all royal Princesses have the family Order. As the word already says it: family. Now it looks like Beatrice and Eugenie, but also Catherine are not really part of the family.
 
From the informative post by Angela I understand that the RFO had the same mechanism as the similar Orders in Norway and Sweden: you get one as a Princess of the Royal House.

When we look to Norway: all royal Princesses have the family Order. When we look to Sweden: also all royal Princesses have the family Order. As the word already says it: family. Now it looks like Beatrice and Eugenie, but also Catherine are not really part of the family.




Hear, hear: The future Queen of GB and N Ireland is "not really part pf the family"...:ROFLMAO::bang::whistling:
 
Yes, I didn't mean between the royals (although the possibility COULD arise). But it seems like a non-clever PR thing. The royal family has it's best PR when it looks like a loving and tight knit family. And this waiting and speculating of the family order puts some strain on that "narrative".

I mean, I can understand the waiting period for the big grand Orders (Garter) but Catherine should have received her Royal Family Order by this time. When I saw her arriving in the ballroom for the State Banquet without her Order, I was shocked. Now, maybe she'll get it this year or by the spring State Visit, but something like the Royal Family Order usually don't take this long to be given. Especially given her seniority status.
 
And Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester must have gotten hers also very early because the King died not even 3 months after her marriage.

Princess Alice and dates of Royal Family Orders

Royal Family Order of King George V, 1935
Royal Family Order of King George VI, 1937
Royal Family Order of Queen Elizabeth II, 1952
 
IMO Queen Elizabeth has made the whole RFO thing unnecessarily complicated. In the past it simply denoted that the lady in question was a member of the royal family and that was it. When a lady entered the British royal family she was given it straight away. Princess Marina of Greece, for example, actually wore the Order of her father in law, King George V, on her wedding dress. His other daughters in law didn't but also received it straight away. Similarly, female royal children received the Order of the Monarch they lived under and would wear that Order in adulthood along with the Order of the current Monarch. Thus we had Princess Margaret wearing George V's; her father George VI's and her sister's Order all at the same time. Princess Alexandra of Kent also wears the George VI Order along with the current Queen's even though she was only a child when she received them. The media also keep saying that so-called 'senior' royal ladies have the RFO when all of them except Kate and Princess Michael have it so that's more poor reporting but I am going off point. Basically the Queen has made the whole issue complicated when it never was before. If it is all to do with 'hard work' then she has not only introduced criteria for receiving it that was never there before but she's also changed her own rules considering that she awarded it to her 16 year old cousin who was still a school girl at the time.



Well, for me the whole british order-system is complicated and, again different from other royal houses!
The Queen seems to make a big difference between men and women. While foreign Prince consorts, being"just" Princes and HRHs, receive an order, the GCVO, Queens (consort), who are titled Majesties like their reigning husbands, never get an order from Elizabeth II. While Queens and Princesses are showered with orders and decorations from all over the world they´re left with nothing in Britain which I always found quite odd.

In other monarchies completely unthinkable not to award a senior member of the visiting royal family, no matter female or male, in the UK when you´re a lady you only seem to be worthy of the honour when your a Queen Regnant...:ermm:

Concerning the duchess of Cambridges RFO: The Queen always awards orders on specific marking dates, like birthdays, jubilees etc. Prince William f. instance was the 1000th knight of the Garter. Her 90th birthday, as suggested before, might be a probable date to grant the young duchess with the order.
 
Last edited:
I mean, I can understand the waiting period for the big grand Orders (Garter) but Catherine should have received her Royal Family Order by this time. When I saw her arriving in the ballroom for the State Banquet without her Order, I was shocked. Now, maybe she'll get it this year or by the spring State Visit, but something like the Royal Family Order usually don't take this long to be given. Especially given her seniority status.

I dunno, you've got Fergie, who never got one; Princess Michael of Kent still hasn't received hers; it was five years before Sophie got one.

I very much agree with those saying they RFO would make much more sense if it was just bestowed automatically - it seems it used to be done that way. I also agree that other royal houses seem to have better systems. I remember back in the early 2000s, when there were so many royal weddings going on and Edward and Sophie were usually sent to represent the Queen, it sometimes seemed like Sophie was the only royal lady present without an order of some kind. I hadn't really paid attention to that kind of thing before, but I remember thinking it a bit odd.
 
Jack,
I am not sure if your theory works as Princesses Elizabeth and Margaret received their Grandfatrher's RFO (George V) when they were quite young in 1935


Princess Alexandra also had George VI's and she was just 16 when he died so also quite young (she had his Coronation Medal as well and she was only 5 months old when that occurred).


Once again I see a number of posters bashing the BRF for doing this differently to those on the continent. Why?


They are all different - just because one family decides to hand orders out like candy and another choose to wait until they actually earn it by working for the family, or for whatever reason the Queen chooses - is no reason to compare them. Enjoy their differences but don't compare them or say 'this family's approach is better than that one's'.


The Queen has her reasons, for giving or not giving the order to Kate, and she won't reveal them to us. That is enough for me.
 
Last edited:
^ King George V and VI didn't have to deal with divorces in the family, nor did the young Queen. It may have been that Fergie didn't get her Order because, within a few years of her marriage into the Royal family, signs were clear that there was trouble ahead.

Those divorces in the 1990's may have made the Queen overly cautious, perhaps. I'm not saying that with regard to Will and Kate's marriage AT ALL and that theory doesn't hold for Bea and Eugenie and Princess Michael (who would probably have been awarded them 40 years ago) but it might be one reason. (Most of the continental royals haven't had divorces in their immediate families either.)
 
Last edited:
Princess Alexandra also had George VI's and she was just 16 when he died so also quite young (she had his Coronation Medal as well and she was only 5 months old when that occurred).


Once again I see a number of posters bashing the BRF for doing this differently to those on the continent. Why?


They are all different - just because one family decides to hand orders out like candy and another choose to wait until they actually earn it by working for the family, or for whatever reason the Queen chooses - is no reason to compare them. Enjoy their differences but don't compare them or say 'this family's approach is better than that one's'.


The Queen has her reasons, for giving or not giving the order to Kate, and she won't reveal them to us. That is enough for me.

I do understand the need for the senior royals to work and earn their orders. We know it takes a while for the royals to receive the major knighthoods. The Royal Family Orders are different and aren't knighthoods. No one expects for The Queen to hand out orders like "candy", Iluvbertie, but Catherine has done a great deal over these past 4 years. She have the Diamond Jubilee Medal, but she has done the work to at least have the Royal Family Order too.

Now maybe she have to participate in another State Visit (Spring 2016) and then the Order will be given to her or The Queen is waiting to give Catherine the Order to help commemorate her 5th wedding anniversary. I'm just saying she's done the work as a senior royal for 4 years and provided two heirs to the throne, and the Order should be given to her by this time.

If the problem lies with the Order being made with ivory, then a new Order should be made by Spinks or royal jewelers without ivory and given to her. The royal could have new ones made.
 
Last edited:
If the Queen felt she had done enough to receive the RFO she would have it. She obviously doesn't believe that she has done enough. Your opinion isn't the one that matters but The Queen's and amazingly she doesn't think that someone who does fewer than 100 engagements at year since marrying into the Royal Family deserves the RFO. She took decades after her aunt died to create Anne Princess Royal - because she demanded that Anne earn it. She waited until Andrew and Edward were in their 40s before giving them the Garter because she demanded that they actually earn it. She made both Sophie and Camilla earn theirs and she is making Kate earn hers. Seems that she actually has standards and simply marrying a prince isn't enough for her to hand it over. Good for her I say.
 
If the Queen felt she had done enough to receive the RFO she would have it. She obviously doesn't believe that she has done enough. Your opinion isn't the one that matters but The Queen's and amazingly she doesn't think that someone who does fewer than 100 engagements at year since marrying into the Royal Family deserves the RFO. She took decades after her aunt died to create Anne Princess Royal - because she demanded that Anne earn it. She waited until Andrew and Edward were in their 40s before giving them the Garter because she demanded that they actually earn it. She made both Sophie and Camilla earn theirs and she is making Kate earn hers. Seems that she actually has standards and simply marrying a prince isn't enough for her to hand it over. Good for her I say.

I'm not sure there's an engagement number requirement in order to receive the Royal Family Order, Iluvbertie.

The Princess Royal title is totally different from the Royal Family Order, Iluvbertie.

I'm just saying that Catherine has worked as a senior member of the royal family for nearly 5 years, and she should have the private family memento by now. Perhaps she's waiting to give it to Catherine to help commemorate Her Majesty's 90th Birthday or in celebration of the Cambridge's 5th Wedding Anniversary. It shouldn't take this long at all.
 
I thought I read somewhere the Sophie got hers after 5 years and Camilla after 7. I don't think Kate will get hers before one of those anniversaries.
 
I thought I read somewhere the Sophie got hers after 5 years and Camilla after 7. I don't think Kate will get hers before one of those anniversaries.

Camilla got the RFO 2 years after marriage and the GCVO 7 years after marriage. Sophie got the RFO 5 years after marriage and became a GCVO 11 years after marriage.

I don't think Catherine has earned her RFO. Sophie did not get hers until 2 years after she was a full time royal. Catherine is not a full time royal. When she becomes a full time royal I have no doubt she will receive an order. Catherine will one day receive the Order of the Garter and other foreign orders. She has plenty of time to get some sashes!
 
I thought I read somewhere the Sophie got hers after 5 years and Camilla after 7. I don't think Kate will get hers before one of those anniversaries.

Well, next year marks the Cambridge's 5th Wedding Anniversary and Her Majesty's 90th Birthday. Perfect year to give a warm accolade to Catherine as a senior member of the royal family. It's been nearly 5 years, that's more of enough time for the RFO.
 
Last edited:
:previous:Well...I wouldn't get your hopes up.

I don't think the Queen works on any specific time table but instead measures the quality of work rather than anyone's tenure in the family. While Catherine is a senior member of the royal family, she has worked part time for majority of her time...yes...a significant portion of that has been on maternity leave...but part time nonetheless.

I would not be surprised to see her get it once she goes Full time royal duties.
 
The Royal Family Order (RFO) and other Royal Orders and Decorations

If people are saying Kate hasn't earned a RFO which is the lowest type of Royal honor (it's not a knighthood) then William has not earned the two highest knighthoods in the land (Garter and Thistle) and Harry wouldn't have got his knighthood either if he was just an army officer and not a Prince.

They aren't full time royals either.

Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
Last edited:
:previous: Talk to the Queen, guys, talk to the Queen. She's the one you've go to to convince.
 
If people are saying Kate hasn't earned a RFO which is the lowest type of Royal honor (it's not a knighthood) then William has not earned the two highest knighthoods in the land (Garter and Thistle) and Harry wouldn't have got his knighthood either if he was just an army officer and not a Prince.

They aren't full time royals either.

Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

Right, they're not full-time royals and they have knighthoods. I'm trying to say that The Queen should give Catherine every honor in the land tonight. I'm just saying that Catherine has worked as a senior royal since 2011, gave birth to two heirs to the throne and worked during the Diamond Jubilee year. She could at least be given the RFO after all this time. That's not much, but a due pat on the back for how far she's come and that she's part of the working family "Firm."
 
If the portraits for the Order are painted on ivory, and if there is a stash already prepared that would be used for Kate's, and if HM is not prepared to have a new one made for her on another medium, I believe it is likely that it is the reason Kate doesn't have one. Or, if she has one, chooses not to wear it.

Kate has popped out the heir and the spare for that generation, and, apart from some issues about skirts and weather conditions, and necklines, I don't think Kate has done anything to frighten the Queen's horses.

No, I think the absence of the yellow ribbon on the red dress at the state banquet is likely to be the ivory, and in particular William's call for Buckingham Palace's collection of ivory, including valuable artwork, to be destroyed. That apparently includes a miniature portrait of HM as a toddler painted in 1928, and HM might be rather fond of it and not want it destroyed. Or the numerous other ivory items in the collection.

A man who wants his grandmother to destroy all the Royal collection of ivoryware is not going to want her to give his wife an ivory brooch, and I doubt he would refrain from expressing his opinion on the subject. I understand Kate has equally strong views on the subject. She would actually go up in my estimation if it turned out she had been given one but refuses to wear it. Such a shame we'll probably never know. If she is seen sporting one at some future date, I'm willing to bet it won't be made of ivory.
 
Last edited:
The Royal Family Order (RFO) and other Royal Orders and Decorations

Did William actually say he wants the Royal ivory destroyed or was it "insider palace sources say he want it destroyed ". His recent speech on Monday talked about not blaming previous generations for their ivory use. To destroy a 200 yr old work of art already made from ivory, won't save a elephant or rhino today. Don't display it in the palace but destroying doesn't help anyone.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
I remember reading that William did want to do away with all things ivory but I think, in time, he's come to realized that to destroy the beautiful works done in ivory is never going to give it back to the animal it came from.

I do also believe that the ivory was the cause of the conundrum with Kate wearing the RFO. As it is something that the Queen gives to family members, perhaps the Queen was astute enough to know there'd been rumors of a RFO for Kate and with the ivory issue she may have figured "OH dear! It will seem like a big slight on my part if Kate doesn't wear that RFO". She then has the most scathingly, brilliant idea to squash any feelings of discord in the royal family and thought that perhaps Kate wearing something that no one besides her had ever worn before would set things right. Other than lending her own engagement ring to Kate, most likely the next most sentimental gift she owns is the bracelet from Philip on her wedding day. That, to me, is a *huge* gesture. It says that HM respects Kate's stance with William against ivory but she wants to show you how much Kate does mean to the family.

At least that's how I see it.
 
Last edited:
I'm sure Spinks (which supplies the royal household with Orders and Knighthood medals) could change the RFO from ivory.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom