Precedence - Who Outranks Who?


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I recently read an article which describes HRH the Duchess of Wellington (née Princess Antonia of Prussia) as the “leading peeress at the State Opening of Parliament.”

I unfortunately can't assist with your question. However, since I don't know whether the article you read was a reliable one, have you verified that the wives of hereditary peers attend the UK State Opening of Parliament? As most British hereditary peers have ceased to be members of the House of Lords, and space at the State Opening is limited, I am not sure what the rationale would be for inviting non-member hereditary peers or their wives to the State Opening.
 
I unfortunately can't assist with your question. However, since I don't know whether the article you read was a reliable one, have you verified that the wives of hereditary peers attend the UK State Opening of Parliament? As most British hereditary peers have ceased to be members of the House of Lords, and space at the State Opening is limited, I am not sure what the rationale would be for inviting non-member hereditary peers or their wives to the State Opening.

The current Duke of Wellington is, however, still a member of the House of Lords.
 
Last edited:
The current Duke of Wellington is, however, still a member of the House of Lords.

Thanks. Sorry, I missed reading your first post, and for some reason I had the wrong impression that the Duke of Norfolk was the only duke remaining in the Lords.
 
Thanks. Sorry, I missed reading your first post, and for some reason I had the wrong impression that the Duke of Norfolk was the only duke remaining in the Lords.

No problem. There are 92 hereditary peers still entitled to sit in the House of Lords (including the Earl Marshal and the Lord Great Chamberlain, who are members ex-officio). According to the Wikipedia, out of those 92 nembers, there are: 4 dukes, 1 marquess, 25 earls, 17 viscounts, 44 barons, and 2 Lords of Parliament.

On the question of precedence, however, as I said, I don't think the Duke of Wellington's foreign titles count, so he should be actually the lowest ranking out of the 4 dukes in the House, but outranks of course all the marquesses, earls, viscounts, barons, and Lords of Parliament.
 
Last edited:
I’m looking at a photo of the 2019 State Opening of Parliament and HRH the Duchess of Wellington is seated first amongst the peeresses. So, I guess the wives (if they have any) of the other dukes in Parliament didn’t attend, leaving the princess as the most senior peeress.
 
what was the order of Precedence for Foreign royals at Queen Elisabeths funeral
did they enter in specifik order in church?
 
what was the order of Precedence for Foreign royals at Queen Elisabeths funeral
did they enter in specifik order in church?


K I N G S

1972
Queen Margrethe II of Denmark and Crown Prince Frederik
(Margrethe now holds the position of Doyenne of all Sovereigns - was Elizabeth II)

1973
King Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden and Queen Silvia

1980
Former Queen Beatrix
King Willem-Alexander of the Netherlands (2013) and Queen Máxima
(Because Willem-Alexander is a reigning King, he was seated before his mother).

1975
Former King Juan Carlos and Queen Sofía
King Felipe of Spain (2014) and Queen Letizia
(Because Felipe is a reigning King, he was seated before his parents but as WA has more anciennity, the Spanish contingent was placed after the Dutch contingent)

1991
King Harald V of Norway and Queen Sonja

2013
King Philippe of the Belgians and Queen Mathilde

------


O T H E R
S O V E R E I G N S

2000
Grand-Duke Henri of Luxembourg and Grand-Duchess María Teresa

2005
Prince Albert II of Monaco and Princess Charlène

-----

F O R M E R
R O Y A L
H O U S E S

1964
Queen Anne-Marie of the Hellenes
Crown Prince Pavlos of Greece and Crown Princess Marie-Chantal
(Pavlos now holds the position of Doyen of all Crown Princes - was Charles III)

2017
Princess Margareta of Romania and Prince Radu
(Margareta is no head-of-state but nevertheless head of a recognized and functioning Royal House inside a republican structure).




PICTURE
 
Last edited:
Thank you. Did they enter the church in that order?
found a picture but i dont know if its at entering or leaving church
https://flipboard.com/topic/unitedk...Qwo5oF1Q:a:2610797541-fe09cc8a93/sheknows.com

https://www.soundhealthandlastingwe...an-royal-families-mourn-the-queen-at-funeral/

thats way i was wondering about the order


They were seated in the Abbey in the order that Duc indicated: Denmark, Sweden, the Netherlands, Spain, Norway, and Belgium. The Dutch were apparentely seated according to Princess Beatrix's precedence as Queen, and the Spaniards according to King Juan Carlos' , but the Spaniards still came after the Dutch delegation, which is a bit confusing since Juan Carlos became king earlier than Beatrix. Perhaps, as Duc said, they averaged out the precedences of Beatrix/Willem-Alexander and Juan Carlos/Felipe VI, which is an odd thing to do.

The Grand Duke of Luxembourg and the Sovereign Prince of Monaco were seated after the King of the Belgians, although both became Sovereigns earlier than King Philippe. Apparently they gave precedence to reigning kings over sovereign HRHs or HSHs.

Also, all non-European sovereigns, or their representatives (Japan, Bhutan, Brunei, Malaysia, Qatar, Oman, Lesotho, Morocco, Tonga, etc.) were given lower precedence in the seating than the European royal houses, including non-reigning houses (for example, Bulgaria, Greece, Romania, and Serbia).

At the committal service in Windsor, it appears that the order of seating in the row where the European monarchs were was, I think, again Denmark, Sweden, Spain and Norway (from right to left); the Belgians did not attend the committal service, nor did the Grand Duke of Luxembourg and the Sovereign Prince of Monaco (I don't know if they were invited or not).
 
Last edited:
They were seated in the Abbey in the order that Duc indicated: Denmark, Sweden, the Netherlands, Spain, Norway, and Belgium. The Dutch were apparentely seated according to Princess Beatrix's precedence as Queen, and the Spaniards according to King Juan Carlos' , but the Spaniards still came after the Dutch delegation, which is a bit confusing since Juan Carlos became king earlier than Beatrix. Perhaps, as Duc said, they averaged out the precedences of Beatrix/Willem-Alexander and Juan Carlos/Felipe VI, which is an odd thing to do.

The Grand Duke of Luxembourg and the Sovereign Prince of Monaco were seated after the King of the Belgians, although both became Sovereigns earlier than King Philippe. Apparently they gave precedence to reigning kings over sovereign HRHs or HSHs.

Also, all non-European sovereigns, or their representatives (Japan, Bhutan, Brunei, Malaysia, Qatar, Oman, Lesotho, Morocco, Tonga, etc.) were given lower precedence in the seating than the European royal houses, including non-reigning houses (for example, Bulgaria, Greece, Romania, and Serbia).

At the committal service in Windsor, it appears that the order of seating in the row where the Europe monarchs were was, I think, again Denmark, Sweden, Spain and Norway (from right to left); the Belgians did not attend the committal service, nor did the Grand Duke of Luxembourg and the Sovereign Prince of Monaco (I don't know if they were invited or not).

In St George's Chapel the seating was the same:

The Queen of Denmark
The King of Sweden
Queen Silvia of Sweden
The King of the Netherlands
Queen Máxima of the Netherlands
Former Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands
The King of Spain
Queen Sofía of Spain
The King of Norway
Queen Sonja of Norway
Queen Anne-Marie of the Hellenes
Crown Prince Pavlos of Greece

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/09/19/16/62583177-11227697-image-a-227_1663601190943.jpg
 
Last edited:
thank you do much

Absolutely I am with you on seating.
I always thought that entering in a certain order was also a part of Precedence

Mbruno i red your post again and saw that you talked about entering in church

but the Spaniards still came after the Dutch delegation, which is a bit confusing since Juan Carlos became king earlier than Beatrix. Perhaps, as Duc said, they averaged out the precedences of Beatrix/Willem-Alexander and Juan Carlos/Felipe VI, which is an odd thing to do.

what i saw in the photos https://www.soundhealthandlastingwe...an-royal-families-mourn-the-queen-at-funeral/
first Dutch delegation then sweden after denmark and then spain. after spain there was belgium
 
Last edited:
I am American as well, and there is definitely glitz and glamour that came from the Kennedys, but despite what you felt about them politically, they were really a family with very few morals and were pushed by the father to social climb. Do you remember what Joe had done to Rosemary (JFK's sister)? She was a little "slow" mentally, I guess you could say, but not severely mentally disabled. But because sometimes her behaviors were a little unpredictable, Joe Kennedy Sr., was embarrassed and behind his wife's back, had a lobotomy performed on her and "the procedure left her permanently incapacitated and rendered her unable to speak intelligibly." She had to be moved from living at home, to living in a full-time nursing home type facility.

And let's not forget the Keenedy men's interpretation of marriage vows as more of a "suggestion," rather than an actual vow or promise. This family was as far from an American Royal Family that I would ever want to identify with as an American.
 
:previous: The Kennedy family is enormous, with several branches ( Shrivers, Lawfords, Smith) The problem with dismissing such a large group of so many people with one brush as having "few morals" is that you forget that this same family gave this country two decorated war heroes, the Peace Corps,the Special Olympics, and Best Buddies.

Who cares who dishonored their marriage vows? Why is that our concern? We don't truly believe that being Royal means being faithful to wedding vows? Nothing could be further from the truth.

Joseph Kennedy, for all his faults, made the disastrous decision to subject poor Rosemary to a lobotomy under the misguided belief that it would help her....not destroy her.

Look at all the large American dynasties like the Bushes, the Roosevelt's and the Rockefellers. Each one has also been referred to as American royalty and each one has some very loud rattling skeletons in their closets.

The Kennedys are simply more glamorous and famous. But no worse than the others.

ETA: Pretty certain this discussion doesn't belong in this thread...
 
Last edited:
:previous: The Kennedy family is enormous, with several branches ( Shrivers, Lawfords, Smith) The problem with dismissing such a large group of so many people with one brush as having "few morals" is that you forget that this same family gave this country two decorated war heroes, the Peace Corps,the Special Olympics, and Best Buddies.

Who cares who dishonored their marriage vows? Why is that our concern? We don't truly believe that being Royal means being faithful to wedding vows? Nothing could be further from the truth.

Joseph Kennedy, for all his faults, made the disastrous decision to subject poor Rosemary to a lobotomy under the misguided belief that it would help her....not destroy her.

Look at all the large American dynasties like the Bushes, the Roosevelt's and the Rockefellers. Each one has also been referred to as American royalty and each one has some very loud rattling skeletons in their closets.

The Kennedys are simply more glamorous and famous. But no worse than the others.

ETA: Pretty certain this discussion doesn't belong in this thread...

Thank you for this. It's weird seeing certain people just get defensive about them being referred as "American Royalty" and act like Royal families having upstanding morals and don't have horrible ancestors.

The Bushes have had affairs, drug problems, lies and etc, yet nobody has a problem with that.

The Roosevelts have had affairs, moral problems, shady money and hell Teddy Roosevelt even tried to put his brother away so he wouldn't ruin his career yet again nobody speaks about those.

Lets not even get started on the Rockefellers.

But its regular the Kennedys who get attacked and you really gotta wonder why.
 
Interesting to see Crown Prince Christian taking precedence over the old Queen Margrethe.

So Denmark follows the example set by Spain and not by the Netherlands regarding the order of precedence.

Indeed. In Spain, both the Princess of Asturias and Infanta Sofia, as descendants of the current King, have higher precedence than King Juan Carlos and Queen Sofia. The former King and Queen, however, outrank Infantas Elena, Cristina and Margarita.

Is there an official order of precedence for members of the Royal House in the Netherlands? I don't think that has ever been published.
 
Last edited:
Interesting to see Crown Prince Christian taking precedence over the old Queen Margrethe.

So Denmark follows the example set by Spain and not by the Netherlands regarding the order of precedence.


Does Beatrix really have precedence over Amalia? After all she is not HM and Queen anymore
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Beatrix is, however, a former head of state, who IMO should outrank a prospective one.

I don’t know if the Dutch order of precedence has been published but on the Royal Family website Beatrix is introduced after the King and Queen and before Amalia. Also in press releases and calendar entries involving multiple members of the family, Beatrix is mentioned before Amalia. Hence my assumption.
 
Interesting to see Crown Prince Christian taking precedence over the old Queen Margrethe.

So Denmark follows the example set by Spain and not by the Netherlands regarding the order of precedence.

QMargrethe is a former queen, so her son, his wife, and their children outrank her. Christian is the heir to the throne now, so he has taken the spot his father held for 52 years.
 
QMargrethe is a former queen, so her son, his wife, and their children outrank her. Christian is the heir to the throne now, so he has taken the spot his father held for 52 years.

This seems to be the Danish intepretation but by no means a universal protocol. For example in the UK the late Queen Mother outranked her grandchildren even though she was only a widow of a former head of state.
 
This seems to be the Danish intepretation but by no means a universal protocol. For example in the UK the late Queen Mother outranked her grandchildren even though she was only a widow of a former head of state.

It is up to each Court to set the precedence rules.

As you said, in the UK, the Queen Mother was given the highest precedence among women after Queen Elizabeth II.

However, in Spain, King Felipe VI's royal decree of 2014 determined that King Juan Carlos and Queen Sofia, upon King Juan Carlos' abdication, would have precedence below King Felipe and Queen Letizia's daughters, but above King Felipe's sisters. That is so even though King Juan Carlos and Queen Sofia retained the style of Majesty while King Felipe's daughters are only HRHs.
 
Last edited:
Question for anyone, ok, mainly our unofficial Royal Forums country ambassador to the court of Denmark, Muhler ;)

Does a former queen regnant or consort that retires has to curtsy to the new king and queen upon greeting in public or private?

Does Queen Mary, in her role as spouse of King Frederik X, has to curtsy to former head of state QMII or are they in some social equal ground?

Does members of the royal family not named King Frederik or Queen Mary, have to curtsy to the new crown prince Christian? like his siblings or his first cousins? or the former queen herself?
 
Last edited:
Christian's siblings don't have to bow/curtsy to him because they're all of equal rank. Joachim never bowed to his brother when he was the Crown Prince that I've ever seen.
 
Question for anyone, ok, mainly our unofficial Royal Forums country ambassador to the court of Denmark, Muhler ;)

Does a former queen regnant or consort that retires has to curtsy to the new king and queen upon greeting in public or private?

Does Queen Mary, in her role as spouse of King Frederik X, has to curtsy to former head of state QMII or are they in some social equal ground?

Does members of the royal family not named King Frederik or Queen Mary, have to curtsy to the new crown prince Christian? like his siblings or his first cousins? or the former queen herself?

Using the precedent of queens dowager in other countries, which also extends in my opinion to a queen emerita, my understanding is that neither Mary nor Daisy have to curtsy to each other, but other members of the Royal Family, including Christian and Joachim/Marie, have to bow or curtsy to both.

Also judging from other countries and from Frederik's own precedent, I don't expect the Family to curtsy to Christian. That would be excessive.

We will see in practice how it will work soon.

EDIT: Although other people curtsied to her as Crown Princess, Mary diligently curtsied to Kings and Queens (or equivalent) for the past 20 years (multiple times), including her peers of similar age (Mathilde,Máxima, and Letizia) who became queens consort before her. I don't think that necessarily bothered Mary, but I am glad that it is her turn now and she won't have to curtsy to anyone anymore, except to Queen Margrethe's coffin (per Danish tradition) at the Queen Emerita's funeral, which hopefully won't happen anytime soon.
 
Last edited:
QMargrethe is a former queen, so her son, his wife, and their children outrank her. Christian is the heir to the throne now, so he has taken the spot his father held for 52 years.

Wasn't it only Christian and not his younger siblings in attendance at the parliamentary reception? So it remains to be seen if Isabella et al also take precedence over their grandmother.

While it wouldn't have been my choice to give Crown Prince Christian precedence over Queen Margrethe, it makes logical sense since he has an active constitutional role as a member of the Council of State and singular official position as the only person automatically entitled to serve as acting regent during the monarch's absences, while she no longer does. But that is not the case for his siblings.
 
Question for anyone, ok, mainly our unofficial Royal Forums country ambassador to the court of Denmark, Muhler ;)

Does a former queen regnant or consort that retires has to curtsy to the new king and queen upon greeting in public or private?

Does Queen Mary, in her role as spouse of King Frederik X, has to curtsy to former head of state QMII or are they in some social equal ground?

Does members of the royal family not named King Frederik or Queen Mary, have to curtsy to the new crown prince Christian? like his siblings or his first cousins? or the former queen herself?

A Majesty (Regnant, Consort or Emerita) never curtsies to another Majesty.

We shall see how King Frederik sets the Court Protocol from now on…. Today there were only hugs and kisses on the cheeks between the family members… I would not be surprised if that is the future
 
Question for anyone, ok, mainly our unofficial Royal Forums country ambassador to the court of Denmark, Muhler ;)

Does a former queen regnant or consort that retires has to curtsy to the new king and queen upon greeting in public or private?

Does Queen Mary, in her role as spouse of King Frederik X, has to curtsy to former head of state QMII or are they in some social equal ground?

Does members of the royal family not named King Frederik or Queen Mary, have to curtsy to the new crown prince Christian? like his siblings or his first cousins? or the former queen herself?

😄

All bow to their majesties. But majesties bow to no one. Right now we have three of them. So they don't bow to each other.

But the rules are a bit lax in DK as they are all closely related. Mary doesn't curtsy to anyone anymore, except her husband and QMII's coffins when that day come. - A pity as she is pretty good at it.

As an unofficial rule so far, adult members of the DRF who are blood related don't bow to each other, they kiss om the cheek. So that basically leaves our Marie who will have to do an awful lot of curtsying from now on.

It will be interesting to see whether Isabella (because we are going to see more of her when the show is on, I believe) and her younger siblings will bow.

The reason for the rules being a bit lax is that they are family and in the eyes of the Danes it would be seen as odd, a bit of a parody in fact, if there was too much bowing going on.
Mary might have been bitten by Joachim who is a stickler for correct protocol, because so far she has maintained a total correct behavior when the royal roadshow is on. I think she does it to maintain the royal decorum and because it looks good - and because no detractors can point a finger at her in that respect.

But when Christian marry at some point I believe his wife will be expected to curtsy in the same way Mary handled herself.

And of course behind closed door, no one bows. They kiss.
 
Interesting new video about the titles King and Queen versus their Spanish and Dutch equivalents

Are English words King and Queen really job titles that became used for rulers or monarchs later on?

 
Last edited:
Wasn't it only Christian and not his younger siblings in attendance at the parliamentary reception? So it remains to be seen if Isabella et al also take precedence over their grandmother.

While it wouldn't have been my choice to give Crown Prince Christian precedence over Queen Margrethe, it makes logical sense since he has an active constitutional role as a member of the Council of State and singular official position as the only person automatically entitled to serve as acting regent during the monarch's absences, while she no longer does. But that is not the case for his siblings.

In the service at Aarhus Cathedral to mark the new reign today, the King's younger children were seated in the second row ahead of Princess Benedikte and Count Ingolf while Queen Margrethe was seated in the first row after the King, Queen and Crown Prince.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom