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

[Roslyn]

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.

He said it to Jane Goodall last year. Prince William 'calls for Buckingham Palace ivory to be destroyed' | UK news | The Guardian Hopefully he has come to his senses in the meantime, and will be content for it just to be removed from display.

 

[Skippyboo]

I don't think he would have the power to destroy ivory in the Royal collection as King. It's held in trust. Just like a King couldn't sell the paintings on the walls of BP to pay off his debts. But I am getting off topic.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[MARG]

I'm sure Spinks (which supplies the royal household with Orders and Knighthood medals) could change the RFO from ivory.

Just like the welsh gold I imagine that there is more than enough ivory remain viable.

I own a pair of earrings and pendant in ivory and think, what am I supposed to do, smash it and bin it? What purpose does that serve? My pieces are very old and when they are gone, how do we explain where all the elephants went and why?

My great-grandmother's fur coat is made of the most beautiful deep gold and brown fur. It's name is lost to history. Many years ago I looked it up in a very old dictionary that stated it was now extinct and had been for a very, very long time.

 

[wartenberg7]

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.

Anne first turned down the title "Princess Royal" long time before her mother intended to bestow it on her and before she accepted it in 1987. So the Queen didn´t intend to wait decades before she wanted to create her daughter with the title!

When it comes to this ivory thing I don´t believe a second that this has anything to do with granting the RFO or not!
The Queen could give Kates late mother-in-law´s. A new one wouldn´t have to be made and it would be a nice momento at the same time!

 

[Osipi]

The fact remains that with endowments such as the RFO that are given to family members and at the Queen's discretion, we will never know when, where, why and how it was presented. HM could simply give the RFO to Camilla because of a mutual love of horses or to Sophie because they both share a love of military history or even not to give one to Princess Michael because she can't stand the way she colors her hair. Its a personal in family kind of thing. If we're talking about service to Crown and country working for the British Royal Family, that's a different order entirely separate from the RFO.

I'm sticking with the ivory issue on this one. Its the one that makes the most sense to me.

As far as existing items that are beautiful and perhaps very meaningful, to destroy them would be criminal in my book. The ongoing campaign now is to keep the ivory with the animal that produces it and try and guarantee that there will be such animals for our children and grandchildren and future generations to come. With this in mind, perhaps Kate does already have a preexisting RFO and it will be worn at a future occasion that doesn't directly involve those that are working to preserve these animals as the UK/China visit was symbolic of with the Chinese president and William coming together for the cause.

 

[tommy100]

I understand that Kate might not want to wear ivory but its not like this is something that will have just cropped up now as an issue. Given how much planning goes into such events I'm sure no one just thought the night before, "oh heck Kate won't wear her RFO as its got ivory in". If the Queen was going to have given Kate the RFO a lot of planning would have gone in to it, sourcing an order for her to wear etc and at this point the problem may have cropped up and a solution found - most likely reusing the frame and putting in a new miniature. My point is if the Queen really wanted Kate to have the RFO a solution could of and would of been found.
That doesn't mean the Queen doesn't like Kate it just means, IMO, that she doesn't yet feel its time to give Kate the RFO for what ever reason.

 

[wyevale]

When Charles lll comes to reign, his RFO will doubtless be painted on something other than ivory.. to make new ones in the twilight of the Queens reign, when there are existing miniatures available seems absurd, and extravagant to me..
Not to use ivory/furs that are old for 'PC' reasons seems equally ridiculous. Not using them will NOT bring the animals back !

 

[tommy100]

It will be interesting to see what happens when Kate does wear the RFO now, with so many people speculating she's not been wearing it because its made of ivory I'm sure when she does turn up wearing it the media will immediately question if its made of ivory or not...

 

[Bryce]

Quote from Angela - "...Queen Elizabeth has made the whole RFO thing unnecessarily complicated..."

Personally, I do not think so. This is not a badge of office like a Lady-in-Waiting wears. This as an gift from the Sovereign.

Queen Victoria's Family Order had 4 classes and could be awarded to ladies of the Royal Family, Foreign Royalty, The Household and other favoured ladies.

QV presented almost 100 RFOs, QEII only 14 (known) to date.

QEII maybe to Font of Honour but she is not the Fountain.

Personally, I think to be 1 of the 14 is quite a privilege. To be given this for "just being a member of the family" is quite trite. Everyone knows they are a member of the Family - but to earn the respect of your Monarch...that is something to strive for and take pride in.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

[....]
Personally, I think to be 1 of the 14 is quite a privilege. To be given this for "just being a member of the family" is quite trite. Everyone knows they are a member of the Family - but to earn the respect of your Monarch...that is something to strive for and take pride in.

Which may lead to the conclusion that the Queen has no respect for the Duchess of Cambridge, for Princess Beatrice of York, for Princess Eugenie of York, for Princess Michael of Kent, etc.?

Which may lead to the conclusion that The Princess Elizabeth, The Princess Margaret and Princess Alexandra, all teenagers, had the "respect" of King George VI, seeing their RFO's from him?

No. I agree with Angela that Queen Elizabeth II has made things unneccessarily complicated by adding speculations et al to the RFO thanks to the completely misty and non-transparant manner this Order is handled.

The newly-wed Princess Sofia of Sweden, Duchess of Värmland got her Family Order and with this the message was clear: "Welcome dearest Sofia, welcome in the royal family! It is my pleasure to hand this little token to you. It bears my portrait, set in gold and silver, encrusted by diamonds. Dearest daughter, live up to this Order. Be welcome, Princess Sofia!" See picture.

 

[Skippyboo]

The Royal Family Order (RFO) and other Royal Orders and Decorations

It wasn't so complicated for the previous reigns. If you were a Royal you got one. The Queen and Margaret were little girls when their grandfather George V dies, but they have his order. Philip got a Garter Knighthood on the eve of his wedding. He hadn't done anything to get the highest knighthood in the land at that point.

Almost every Royal lady who would have to attend events where the RFO would be worn has one except Princess Michael, Fergie and Kate. If Kate somehow has it but cant wear it because of the ivory (which I can see being a issue with this recent state dinner right after William 's speech ) drop the awarding in the CC.

Having a new one made doesn't seem practical for a Queen that is going to be in her 90s next year . Kate really the only one left that might get one. Harry's wife doesn't exist yet and there wouldn't be enough time for her to "earn it". Maybe if they start working on the mini portrait of Charles on non ivory before the reign starts, they can do one of the Queen. Make it a different picture than the young Queen that is on her RFOs so it obvious it isn't the ivory one.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Roslyn]

I don't think it would take long to make a new one for Kate. They're only small. One of HM's people would just have to make a phone call and some artist would be able to paint one within a week, I would think. It could probably be done by computer within a day, though I like to think it would be done by hand.

I don't like the idea of Kate being given Diana's old one. She should get one of her own, not another of Diana's hand-me-downs. And it would have been on ivory, anyway, so it's a no-no.

 

[MARG]

I am stunned at all the chivvying for Catherine to get a RFO. This is totally within the Queen's gift. Hers to set the criteria, hers to decide by whatever that that criteria is met by whatever measure she has set.

The constant moaning that other royal houses do it in a way more acceptable to them is insulting. This is the House of Windsor and they do things their way, as they should. That the heart of the complaint is that Catherine doesn't have one is doubly insulting. HM is not required to do things differently simply because Catherine doesn't happen to have received one, or perhaps she hasn't earned it.

The point is, we do not know what the Queen's criteria is and I hope we never do.

 

[grevinnan]

I am stunned at all the chivvying for Catherine to get a RFO. This is totally within the Queen's gift. Hers to set the criteria, hers to decide by whatever that that criteria is met by whatever measure she has set.

The constant moaning that other royal houses do it in a way more acceptable to them is insulting. This is the House of Windsor and they do things their way, as they should. That the heart of the complaint is that Catherine doesn't have one is doubly insulting. HM is not required to do things differently simply because Catherine doesn't happen to have received one, or perhaps she hasn't earned it.

The point is, we do not know what the Queen's criteria is and I hope we never do.

Spot on. You will be thoroughly chastised for being reasonable and logical.

 

[Roslyn]

I am stunned at all the chivvying for Catherine to get a RFO. This is totally within the Queen's gift. Hers to set the criteria, hers to decide by whatever that that criteria is met by whatever measure she has set.

The constant moaning that other royal houses do it in a way more acceptable to them is insulting. This is the House of Windsor and they do things their way, as they should. That the heart of the complaint is that Catherine doesn't have one is doubly insulting. HM is not required to do things differently simply because Catherine doesn't happen to have received one, or perhaps she hasn't earned it.

The point is, we do not know what the Queen's criteria is and I hope we never do.

It's not just about Kate.

I think that the very capriciousness of this order devalues it. We see one aging monarch handing them out to two little girls, his son giving one to a 16 year old, then that king's daughter handing one out to her eldest son's two wives after about two years of marriage yet not giving one to her second son's wife or daughters, and not giving one to the wife of the eldest son's elder son despite her having carried out a goodly number of engagements and produced a future king and spare.

If it is a personal gift with no objective criteria for the giving of it, I don't think it matters much, save to raise the question of why a particular woman hasn't received one. It makes wonder why that person, who to those of us who are not in the know (and with the exception of Sarah, who probably gave HM good cause to be cautious from the outset), appears to have done nothing outrageous, has not been given one.

HM is at an age when she could suddenly suffer a health event that could incapacitate her and put an end to her ability to carry out her duties and make decisions, and then it will be too late to be handing out her RFOs. Does she really not want her York grand-daughters to have one? Andrew is supposed to be a favoured son, and the girls were given HRHs and have not been associated with any scandal, so why don't they have them? They're not likely to get one from Charles when he's king so Elizabeth is their only chance.

As for Kate, after this amount of time and two children, I reckon that if she is going to be sitting in the second-lady-of-the-land seat at state banquets it's very strange that she isn't wearing the tangible evidence that she has the Queen's personal favour.

 

[Dman]

I am stunned at all the chivvying for Catherine to get a RFO. This is totally within the Queen's gift. Hers to set the criteria, hers to decide by whatever that that criteria is met by whatever measure she has set.

The constant moaning that other royal houses do it in a way more acceptable to them is insulting. This is the House of Windsor and they do things their way, as they should. That the heart of the complaint is that Catherine doesn't have one is doubly insulting. HM is not required to do things differently simply because Catherine doesn't happen to have received one, or perhaps she hasn't earned it.

The point is, we do not know what the Queen's criteria is and I hope we never do.

Hi MARG,

I wasn't moaning about Catherine not having the RFO. I was just shocked when Catherine arrived at the State Banquet without her RFO. I just thought after all this time with Catherine carrying out official engagements across the UK and representing The Queen abroad on foreign royal tours, worked helping celebrate The Queen's Diamond Jubilee and given birth to two heirs to the throne, that she would at least have the Royal Family Order of Queen Elizabeth II by now. I'm not stating what The Queen should do, but rather making a point of Catherine's great progress as a senior member of the royal family.

 

[Rudolph]

The Queen is like this with all orders, not just the RFO. Look around the family and there is clearly no set time or criteria for any order.

I know people who won't rest until Harry has the Garter and if he were Queen Victoria's grandson he would have it but as it is he was made KCVO this year.

Prince Andrew was made CVO at 21 but was 43 before he got KCVO

Princess Anne and Prince William have the Thistle but Andrew and Edward do not.

Sophie Wessex was made GCVO before her husband Edward.

We'll drive ourselves mad trying to figure it all out.

 

[AdmirerUS]

I think Elizabeth, better than anyone else believes that a member of the royal family must not just carry on the line, but must show a high level of duty and dedication to the Commonwealth to fulfill the royal role. I think of the speech she made in Christmas 1952 is the kind of standard to which she holds her family in awarding honours: http://www.royal.gov.uk/imagesandbr...ristmasbroadcasts/christmasbroadcast1952.aspx

 

[Isabella]

The Queen is like this with all orders, not just the RFO. Look around the family and there is clearly no set time or criteria for any order.

I know people who won't rest until Harry has the Garter and if he were Queen Victoria's grandson he would have it but as it is he was made KCVO this year.

Prince Andrew was made CVO at 21 but was 43 before he got KCVO

Princess Anne and Prince William have the Thistle but Andrew and Edward do not.

Sophie Wessex was made GCVO before her husband Edward.

We'll drive ourselves mad trying to figure it all out.

Yes, these things can all seem a bit haphazard and I agree that we'll end up driving ourselves mad trying to figure it out. Personally, I'm not that fussed about who has what order because I don't know HM's reasoning behind bestowing them, or the timing at which she decides to do so. It's interesting to me to see that so many people think they know, and used their imagined criteria for why someone should or shouldn't have a particular order.

When it comes to the RFO, though, it seems a perfectly reasonable suggestion to me that it would be given essentially automatically when someone joins the family. It's not only that other royal families do it that way, but that the British royal family used to do it as well. And it makes sense to me to receive a "family" order upon joining the family. But it's HM's decision to make, of course. Maybe she just likes messing with our heads.

 

[Dman]

Yes, these things can all seem a bit haphazard and I agree that we'll end up driving ourselves mad trying to figure it out. Personally, I'm not that fussed about who has what order because I don't know HM's reasoning behind bestowing them, or the timing at which she decides to do so. It's interesting to me to see that so many people think they know, and used their imagined criteria for why someone should or shouldn't have a particular order.

When it comes to the RFO, though, it seems a perfectly reasonable suggestion to me that it would be given essentially automatically when someone joins the family. It's not only that other royal families do it that way, but that the British royal family used to do it as well. And it makes sense to me to receive a "family" order upon joining the family. But it's HM's decision to make, of course. Maybe she just likes messing with our heads.

I didn't even know that men used to receive the RFO as well. I was just used to seeing women wearing the orders.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

I am stunned at all the chivvying for Catherine to get a RFO. This is totally within the Queen's gift. Hers to set the criteria, hers to decide by whatever that that criteria is met by whatever measure she has set.

The constant moaning that other royal houses do it in a way more acceptable to them is insulting. This is the House of Windsor and they do things their way, as they should. That the heart of the complaint is that Catherine doesn't have one is doubly insulting. HM is not required to do things differently simply because Catherine doesn't happen to have received one, or perhaps she hasn't earned it.

The point is, we do not know what the Queen's criteria is and I hope we never do.

Jumpy claps for this post, MARG. A hundred thousand of them.

ETA: The fact that the DoC appeared in public wearing such sentimental and gorgeous jewelry on loan from HM's private collection is much more impressive to me personally than a RFO would have been.

 

[COUNTESS]

Who cares, except few people on this site. Kate does a great job. Royal Orders are an archaic acknowledgement, of something past. They are giben at the whim of the giver. Doesn't change spit in real life.

 

[royal rob]

Jumpy claps for this post, MARG. A hundred thousand of them.

ETA: The fact that the DoC appeared in public wearing such sentimental and gorgeous jewelry on loan from HM's private collection is much more impressive to me personally than a RFO would have been.

Yep !I think to be loaned jewelry from your husbands grandmother that was designed by his grandfather and worn on their wedding is far better and says a more than anything. But maybe that's why some are questioning the RFO. .. Me I'd go for the jewels every time diamonds go with everything

 

[Dman]

The bracelets were very precious and personal loans indeed, but the Royal Family Order is something very special for the senior royal ladies of the House of Windsor. It's one of those family mementos that they are proud to wear whenever they can.

 

[royal rob]

I don't think Kate would be worried about it. I think she's very happy with her life.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Dman]

I suspect she'll have it by the end of this year or into the new year. The Cambridge's might attend the Diplomatic Corps Reception in December and there will be another State Visit in the spring.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

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.

I am stunned at all the chivvying for Catherine to get a RFO. This is totally within the Queen's gift. Hers to set the criteria, hers to decide by whatever that that criteria is met by whatever measure she has set.

The constant moaning that other royal houses do it in a way more acceptable to them is insulting. This is the House of Windsor and they do things their way, as they should. That the heart of the complaint is that Catherine doesn't have one is doubly insulting. HM is not required to do things differently simply because Catherine doesn't happen to have received one, or perhaps she hasn't earned it.

The point is, we do not know what the Queen's criteria is and I hope we never do.

I think Elizabeth, better than anyone else believes that a member of the royal family must not just carry on the line, but must show a high level of duty and dedication to the Commonwealth to fulfill the royal role. I think of the speech she made in Christmas 1952 is the kind of standard to which she holds her family in awarding honours: http://www.royal.gov.uk/imagesandbr...ristmasbroadcasts/christmasbroadcast1952.aspx

Jumpy claps for this post, MARG. A hundred thousand of them.

ETA: The fact that the DoC appeared in public wearing such sentimental and gorgeous jewelry on loan from HM's private collection is much more impressive to me personally than a RFO would have been.

Yep !I think to be loaned jewelry from your husbands grandmother that was designed by his grandfather and worn on their wedding is far better and says a more than anything. But maybe that's why some are questioning the RFO. .. Me I'd go for the jewels every time diamonds go with everything

Great posts!

To those of you who nag about this RFO thing, and compares it with Orders and Decorations in other countries, You must remember that British monarchs in modern times have always done it this way. The Queen is almost 90 and has been on the throne since 1952, and she's not going to change things now.

The Queen belives, as AdmirerUS says ''that a member of the royal family must not just carry on the line, but must show a high level of duty and dedication to the Commonwealth to fulfill the royal role'', and at least be a full time royal before you get any Orders/Decorations.

Diana received the RFO the same year she married, but she was married to the heir.

Camilla (also married to the heir) received it 2007, in her 3rd year as a fulltime working royal.

This has nothing to do with the personal relationship between the Queen and Kate. Sarah didn't receive anything, but she has always had a close relationship with the Queen.

And the fact that the Queen loaned Kate these particular bracelets speak volumes.

And I can reassure all of you that she will the receive the RFO when she becomes a full time working royal, maybe before.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

I am stunned at all the chivvying for Catherine to get a RFO. This is totally within the Queen's gift. Hers to set the criteria, hers to decide by whatever that that criteria is met by whatever measure she has set.

The constant moaning that other royal houses do it in a way more acceptable to them is insulting. This is the House of Windsor and they do things their way, as they should. That the heart of the complaint is that Catherine doesn't have one is doubly insulting. HM is not required to do things differently simply because Catherine doesn't happen to have received one, or perhaps she hasn't earned it.

The point is, we do not know what the Queen's criteria is and I hope we never do.

Come on, only because it is Elizabeth II, you immediately jump in defence mode. You sound like going to the loo after the Queen has left her big message there and say: "It all smelled like perfume, Ma'am!"

Great posts!

[.... ] You must remember that British monarchs in modern times have always done it this way. [....]
[...]

That is not true. When monarchy is about continuity and tradition, then Queen Elizabeth II is quite different from her father, her grandfather, her great-grandfather, etc. whom all handed out the RFO à la Norway and Sweden: to all Princesses of the Royal House, even when they were just kids.

 

[hernameispekka]

One thing that made me want for the Queen to give Kate (and even Charlotte) the RFO as soon as possible is also becaue we don't know if the Queen will be here tomorrow to give it out. It might sound harsh, but I think it would be "smarter" to give it out a little early so that they don't miss out on it.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

That is not true. When monarchy is about continuity and tradition, then Queen Elizabeth II is quite different from her father, her grandfather, her great-grandfather, etc. whom all handed out the RFO á la Norway and Sweden: to all Princesses of the Royal House, even when they were just kids.

Did all the ladies who married princes from 1901 to 1952 receive it at their wedding day/their first year in the royal family? I doubt it.