Order of Precedence 1: Ending 2022

[Artemisia]

I know Camilla, Anne and Sophie take precedence over Catherine but I'm mainly talking about the precedence of the royals attending events.

It's more or less the same, actually.
For instance, if a group of royals were to attend an event (such as a wedding), the precedence would determine who arrives when and in what order.
I'm talking about official and semi-official events, which is when Order of Precedence is really implemented anyway. Otherwise, it's of interest mainly for royal watchers.

 

[Molly2101]

Actually, Princess Anne - as the Sovereign's daughter - does have precedence over the wife of the Sovereign's grandson.

The Official Order of Precedence
- Queen Elizabeth (The Queen)
- The Duchess of Cornwall (the wife of the Sovereign's eldest son)
- The Countess of Wessex (the wife of the Sovereign's younger son)
- The Princess Royal (the Sovereign's daughter)
- The Duchess of Cambridge (the wife of the Sovereign's grandson)
- Autumn Phillips (the wife of the Sovereign's grandson)
- Princess Beatrice (the Sovereign's granddaughter)
- Princess Eugenie (the Sovereign's granddaughter)
- Lady Louise (the Sovereign's granddaughter)
- Zara Phillips (the Sovereign's granddaughter)
- Lady Serena Stanhope (Wife of the Sovereign's nephew)
- Lady Sarah Chatto (Sovereign's niece)
- Birgitte, Duchess of Gloucester (Wife of the Sovereign's cousin)
- Katharine, Duchess of Kent (Wife of the Sovereign's cousin)
- Princess Michael of Kent (Wife of the Sovereign's cousin)
- Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy (Sovereign's cousin)

The Private Order of Precedence (which is entirely at the Sovereign's will):
- Queen Elizabeth (the Sovereign)
- Princess Anne (British Princess by birth)
- Princess Beatrice (British Princess by birth)
- Princess Eugenie (British Princess by birth)
- Lady Louise (British Princess by birth) *
- Princess Alexandra (British Princess by birth)
- Camilla, The Duchess of Cornwall (British Princess by marriage)
- Sophie, The Countess of Wessex (British Princess by marriage)
- Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge (British Princess by marriage)
- Autumn Phillips
- Zara Phillips

* Assuming we accept Lady Louise is a Princess by birth (as per Letters Patent 1917), despite not using the title.

I always accept Louise as a British Princess, even though she does not use the title. She will always be Princess Louise of Wessex, even if she uses Lady.

The order of precedence is something I don't think I will ever understand. I imagine you really only know how it works when you are a part of it, as it so often changed for occasions. I never understand why if in the order of precedence, Catherine comes after Sophie as she is only the wife of a Grandson, yet when the family process out of churches and such, William is ahead of his uncles. I am guessing procession has nothing to do with precedence? And what is even more confusing is it will all change as soon as Charles becomes King. Andrew and Edward will be pushed right down to coming after any children William and Harry have. It's odd but nothing lasts forever. (Princess Alexandra was 6th in line to the throne at the time of her birth, now she is 41st!)

This whole "3rd Lady of the Land" is quite annoying. Who really cares, they are all HRH, surely they all know they are higher up than most other women in the family.

It's more or less the same, actually.
][bFor instance, if a group of royals were to attend an event (such as a wedding), the precedence would determine who arrives when and in what order.[/b]
I'm talking about official and semi-official events, which is when Order of Precedence is really implemented anyway. Otherwise, it's of interest mainly for royal watchers.

Zara's wedding was obviously a private event, but William arrived after Edward and Andrew (Edward arrived, then Andrew etc.), yet the precedence lists him before William. It is so confusing, particularly when it changes from occasion to occasion.

On the Order of Precedence wikipedia page (it is Wikipedia, however) the precedence for females lists Autumn before the Queen's grand daughters as she is the wife of a Sovereign's grandson. Surely that is not correct.

 

[Artemisia]

I always accept Louise as a British Princess, even though she does not use the title. She will always be Princess Louise of Wessex, even if she uses Lady.

I am in complete agreement with you. Until such time new Letters Patent are issued, Lady Louise is a British Princess by birth.
Of course, honouring her parents' and the Queen's wishes, I always refer to her as Lady Louise (not that they would care if I didn't).

Zara's wedding was obviously a private event, but William arrived after Edward and Andrew (Edward arrived, then Andrew etc.), yet the precedence lists him before William. It is so confusing, particularly when it changes from occasion to occasion.

Zara's wedding was indeed a private affair and guests could arrive in pretty much any order they wanted or the hosts had stipulated.
Prince Charles and Diana's wedding would give a more accurate outlook at how precedent works; because it was a state occasion, everyone arrived in the precise order they were supposed to, the last one (apart from the bride, of course) being the Duke of Edinburgh, the Queen Mother and the Queen.

On the Order of Precedence wikipedia page (it is Wikipedia, however) the precedence for females lists Autumn before the Queen's grand daughters as she is the wife of a Sovereign's grandson. Surely that is not correct.

It is actually quite accurate, and indeed I have Autumn listed above the Queen's granddaughters in my Official Precedence list as well.
Autumn is the wife of the Sovereign's grandson. In essence, she is no different to the Duchess of Cambridge or Prince Harry's future wife.
Just because Peter Phillips is an untitled commoner, it doesn't change the fact he is the Queen's grandson. In past, the situation when the Sovereign's grandson had no titles simply didn't exist. Princess Anne's decision not to accept any titles for her children created an entirely new situation but did not change the Precedence.

 

[Dman]

Actually the Order of Precedence did apply to Mike & Zara's wedding. Here you can see the order of arrivals for the royal family-

Royal Wedding: Zara Phillips Weds Mike Tindall - part 1 - YouTube

Here you can see the order of departures-

Royal Wedding: Zara Phillips Weds Mike Tindall - part 2 - YouTube

 

[Molly2101]

I am in complete agreement with you. Until such time new Letters Patent are issued, Lady Louise is a British Princess by birth.[

Of course, honouring her parents' and the Queen's wishes, I always refer to her as Lady Louise (not that they would care if I didn't).

Exactly. Until the Letters change, Louise is still a Princess by birth and I do wish her parents allowed her and James to use their Princely statuses, but I also commend them for wishing their children lead private lives and do not end up being in the situation Beatrice and Eugenie are in. I have no doubt that Charles will issue new Letters as soon as he is King. Would that mean that Louise and James would have no right to use their Princely titles if they ever wanted to? Would they be completely stripped of them? I refer to her as Lady Louise too, but there is always a little voice that says "Princess Lou!" (although Lady Lou sounds cuter.)

Actually the Order of Precedence did apply to Mike & Zara's wedding. Here you can see the order of arrivals for the royal family-

Royal Wedding: Zara Phillips Weds Mike Tindall - part 1 - YouTube

Here you can see the order of departures-

Royal Wedding: Zara Phillips Weds Mike Tindall - part 2 - YouTube

Now you see, Edward arrived first, yet William arrived just before his father even though he is below both Andrew and Edward. On the way out the family obviously walked out of the church as they do in many occasions (sSuch as the Diamond Jubilee service) when William coming before his uncles. That is always how it is, yet if precedence is correct William is after his uncles. It is a confusing process!

Zara and Peter did not arrive in Royal cars with Anne for the Diamond Jubilee service (nor did they leave in one either), however they walked out of the church behind their mother and they sat at the front with the other family members. I know they are not titled Royals, but it is obvious that this was following precedence, putting them before the Gloucester's and Kents. It was the same with the Royal wedding, the Phillip's did not arrive in cars with their other mother, aunt, uncles and cousins yet they walked out after them. Is there a reason for this or is it simply because they are not HRH? I understand Louise travelled with her parents due to her being under 18, therefore taking her parents' precedence, but when she turns 18 will she then be beind with Peter and Zara? (How odd it will look with Louise walking with Peter and Zara after she is 18, yet James will be with his parents. Will that happen?)

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

I am under the understanding that prince/ss is a courtesy title and carries with it NO legal standing. How can people say Louise or James are legally prince/ss? Legally to me , means they would have recourse in the courts and I don't how a courtesy would hold up in court.

This style of Prince "is purely a courtesy and the holders of that title remain commoners until they are raised to the Peerage, the only exception being the eldest son of the Sovereign who at birth or, as in the case of Prince Charles, at his mother's accession to the Throne, immediately becomes Duke of Cornwall" (H. Austin Strutt, assistant under-secretary of state, in a memo dated June 17th, 1954 prepared for the Home Secretary; HO 286/50). See also Garter's statement that "the title of Prince is (in this country) normally a courtesy title indicating certain degrees of relationship to the Sovereign and having no power to govern." --- http://www.heraldica.org

 

[Artemisia]

The titles of British Prince and Princesses are entirely at the will of the Sovereign who can bestow or taken them away. In 1917, George V issued Letters Patent which, among other things, contained regulation as to who is automatically entitled to be styled as a British Prince or Princess. Lady Louise, as male-line granddaughter of the Monarch, falls under that category.

Until such time as new Letters Patent and/or Royal Proclamations are issued nullifying or modifying the 1917 one, Lady Louise and Viscount Severn can legally be considered to be a Princess and Prince.

When Peers inherit their titles, they don't have to do anything with the courts either; they simply ascend to certain titles by means stipulated in the original Letters Patent that had created their respective titles.

 

[NGalitzine]

I am under the understanding that prince/ss is a courtesy title and carries with it NO legal standing. How can people say Louise or James are legally prince/ss? Legally to me , means they would have recourse in the courts and I don't how a courtesy would hold up in court.

Because the 1917 Letters Patent, which have not been revised, grant the style and titulature of HRH Prince/Princess of the United Kingdom to male line granchildren of the monarch. So as male line grandchildren Louise and James would be covered by the Letters Patent. They are styled as the children of an earl because that is what their parents wanted and HM agreed. It is also fully in line with slimming down the BRF. Any member of the BRF who is not a peer is legally a commoner regardless of how they are styled and titled.
This is not the first time that a British princess has been known by something other than their princely title. Edward VII granted his female line granddaughters the style and title of HH Princess of the UK. George V did not approve of this so when his niece HH Princess Maud of Fife married he stated that she would be known as Lady Carnegie. Her title as princess was never formally revoked she simply stopped being known as such.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

But according to Bitish law, only Peerages need to be created by LPs. (Because they carry with them legal responsibility) All other styles and titles, other than a Peerage can bestowed by warrant, press release or verbal declaration,

 

[NGalitzine]

I think this conversation is moving away from the topic of precendence which is different than titles.

 

[Dman]

I think understanding the Order of Precedence can be very difficult. As the the Royal Website puts it-

{Precedence: determines the seniority of members of the Royal Family at official events and is influenced by a variety of laws, and by custom and tradition. Precedence among members of the Royal Family at private events is a matter for The Queen's discretion.}

Read More Here-
Precedence

 

[vkrish]

Let me try..

Actually this is not that complicated and confusing..first remove from your mind the fact the Louise and james have lesser titles or Princess Royal's kids have no titles..
There is nothing titles are gonna change..The only factor that is gonna matter is..The way they are related to the sovereign..through a son or a daughter..and that son/daughter's place in order of male primogeniture..Now just start working on it..everything will be simplified..

Ex:Peter Phillips is Queen's eldest grandson..But why is he listed after James, the youngest?
Sol:He maybe eldest, but his mother (his link to the sovereign, the most imp. thing) is last in order of male primogeniture among Sov's kids..Got it?

Now one interesting deviation from this norm, as many of you rightly felt, is..Why are Princes William and Harry given precedence over the Sovereign's other kids, when William should actually come after Princess Royal..This is a very genuine question..And I hope to answer this..The Wiki page on OoP states, as an exception,

The Court Circular also lists Prince William, Duke of Cambridge above his uncles, Prince Andrew, Duke of York, and Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex, which suggests that he takes precedence over them.
And so is Prince Harry, and so will be their respective wives and kids..

BUT Y?
This is not a genuine answer but some interpretation with a bit of common sense..
See..if Charles' kids and grandkids are far behind his siblings, once the Queen dies..they gotta shout..
"All you..off to the back benches..The Queen is dead..And Sirs, may you please sit next to the King and Queen"..Got it? So now they have altered it so that the Precedence expands in only one direction and need not have to reverse at the change of every reign..
And Wikipedia will not have to add new lines about so and so..
At time of his birth he is xth in line to the throne
At present he is yth in line to the throne
During reign of QEII he was nth in OoP
During reign of KCIII he was mth in OoP
During reign of KWV he was pth in OoP..and it would go on..

What do you think of this post? Made any sense?

And whoever has doubts regarding OoP just post them..We ll discuss..its become my fav..
And The Ladies OoP is an entirely similar one, though slightly different in spirit..L post bout it later..
(I secretly admit that "I am not amused " with HM for starting that all new fuss..which anyway has no relevance officially..God knows which bug bit her to do this..)

And one more..The word "senior royal"is a total total misnomer..That just indicates their place is higher compared to others..God..calling Prince Harry senior to Princess Alexandra..seriously..couldnt they find another proper term..

 

[Kit]

Honestly I think I will never understand the OOP. William takes precedence over his uncles so Kate would take precedence over Sophie wouldn't she ???

 

[vkrish]

Ok see..

Honestly I think I will never understand the OOP. William takes precedence over his uncles so Kate would take precedence over Sophie wouldn't she ???

Kit, I told you bringing William and Harry and their future families ahead of their uncles and aunt may be to avoid a huge re-shuffling at all official events and circulars once the reign changes (Queen dies)..
But Ladies' Order is a completely private one..no official standing (no one stands in that line while gossiping with Queen and no one curtsies ny1..xcpt HM)..so no need for alteration as per convenience..So Will and Harry's wives are not brought ahead..Just in her correct place as grandson's wife, after sons' wives..
Got it?

 

[Dman]

I'm just going to go by what the Precedence statement say on the Official Website of The British Monarchy-
Precedence

Otherwise I'm confused.

 

[Kit]

The only thing that is clear to me that the DOE comes directly after HM as is stated on the Official Homepage. the rest depends on HM decisions. Though I have always wondered about the precedence of The Queen Mother.

 

[Iluvbertie]

The Queen Mother took precedence immediately after The Queen, except when the Queen was accompanied by Philip. During the first year of the Queen reign Queen Mary came after The Queen Mother.

A Queen Consort whose husband has died takes precedence immediately after the new monarch and their spouse and ahead of the any previous living Queen Consort - so The Mother went through her royal life as - after Queen Mary when she first married, after Queen Mary when George V died but then ahead of Queen Mary when George VI became King and remained ahead of Queen Mary when George VI died.

If Philip outlives The Queen, Charles will have to issue a statement given Philip appropriate precedence as it isn't automatic for a Prince Consort - just as The Queen had to issue instructions giving him precedence next to herself, except when provided by law - otherwise he would be behind Charles at least.

Precedence appears confusing but really is quite simple - based on relationship to the monarch.

Where people are getting confused is that at things like church services families enter together and sit together even if they are entering out of precedence order e.g. William and Harry sit with their father rather than after their uncles not because they have precedence over their uncles but because they sit with their father.

What we don't see is a situation where say William and Andrew are both wanting to see The Queen outside a door at BP - which one enters first. According to my reading of the precedence rules Andrew - as The Queen's son would enter ahead of William her grandson but if Charles was with William and Andrew then Charles and William, as one family, would enter before Andrew.

I do remember back in the summer when the story of the female precedence 'broke' or was 'repeated for the umpteenth time' (first broke back in 2005 when Camilla married into the family) there was the report of Camilla having to wait to enter a church for a wedding because Princess Alexandra was also attending and Alexandra took precedence. I can't remember whether that story also had Camilla curtseying to Alexandra.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

I think this conversation is moving away from the topic of precendence which is different than titles.

My apologies

 

[Queen Camilla]

Actually, Princess Anne - as the Sovereign's daughter - does have precedence over the wife of the Sovereign's grandson.

I believe it is by generation, blood first. When Princess Anne became Princess Royal she became the senior Princess in the country. Previous regents also moved up the daughter of the Princess royal. ex: Edward VII

The Official Order of Precedence
- Queen Elizabeth (The Queen)
- The Princess Royal (the Sovereign's daughter)
- The Duchess of Cornwall (the wife of the Sovereign's eldest son)
- The Countess of Wessex (the wife of the Sovereign's younger son)
- The Duchess of Cambridge (the wife of the Sovereign's grandson)
- Zara Phillips (the Sovereign's granddaughter)* she might place after Eugenie but definitely before Autumn
- Princess Beatrice (the Sovereign's granddaughter)
- Princess Eugenie (the Sovereign's granddaughter)
- Autumn Phillips (the wife of the Sovereign's grandson)
- Lady Serena Stanhope (Wife of the Sovereign's nephew)
- Lady Sarah Chatto (Sovereign's niece)
- Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy (Sovereign's cousin)
- Birgitte, Duchess of Gloucester (Wife of the Sovereign's cousin)
- Katharine, Duchess of Kent (Wife of the Sovereign's cousin) Didn't she also convert to Catholicism
- Princess Michael of Kent (Wife of the Sovereign's cousin) *Catholic so is excluded
- Lady Louise (the Sovereign's granddaughter)* minor & is not included

The Private Order of Precedence (which is entirely at the Sovereign's will):
- Queen Elizabeth (the Sovereign)
- Princess Anne (British Princess by birth)
- Princess Alexandra (British Princess by birth)
- Camilla, The Duchess of Cornwall (British Princess by marriage)
- Sophie, The Countess of Wessex (British Princess by marriage)
- Zara Phillips
- Princess Beatrice (British Princess by birth)
- Princess Eugenie (British Princess by birth)
- Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge (British Princess by marriage)
- Autumn Phillips
- Lady Louise (British Princess by birth) *Minor is not included in precedence.

 

[Lumutqueen]

And again, in the Official Order of Precedence the Sovereigns Daughters come 5th after The Sovereign, Queen Dowagers, the wife of the Sovereigns eldest son, Wives of Sovereigns younger sons and then Sovereigns daughters.

You can't magically change the way things are. The Princess Royal comes 5th.

 

[Warren]

When Princess Anne became Princess Royal she became the senior Princess in the country.

The title of Princess Royal carries no weight in Official or Court precedence apart from the fact that it is customarily bestowed on the Sovereign's eldest daughter.
Being the eldest daughter determines precedence, not whatever title that daughter may bear.

Similarly with the Earl of Wessex. We know that Dukes have precedence over Earls, and Royal Dukes have precedence over Dukes. The fact that Prince Edward is a Royal Earl has no relevance to anything. His position in the Official and Court orders of precedence is based entirely on his being a "younger son of the Sovereign".

When Charles becomes King both Prince Andrew, Duke of York, and Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex (or newly re-created Duke of Edinburgh), will fall into the category of "brothers of the Sovereign", with precedence immediately following the sons (if any) of William and Harry. Once again, it will not be their titles which determine their precedence in the new reign but their blood relationship to the Sovereign.

The concept is simple: the British Aristocracy falls into a strict hierarchy of Duke-Marquess-Earl-Viscount-Baron with precedence largely determined by title and therefore fixed in place. However, the Royal Family sits at the apex of this hierarchy and is not part of it. Precedence within the royal caste is based entirely on each member's degree of kinship to the Sovereign; their relative positions will change over time due to births and deaths but more dramatically at the accession of a new Sovereign.

 

[kbk]

Where is the Dowager Countess of Harewood here? Do the Sovereign's royal cousins' wives lose they place in the order of precedence after widowhood?

 

[Artemisia]

Where is the Dowager Countess of Harewood here? Do the Sovereign's royal cousins' wives lose they place in the order of precedence after widowhood?

I had deliberately omitted the Dowager Countess from my list of Order of Precedence because I am unsure whether she, as widow of the Queen's cousin, is still included in the Order of Precedence for female members of the Royal Family.

As far as I know, widows do not lose their place in the precedence list. Their place may be subject to change though as, for instance is with a Queen Consort who becomes a Queen Dowager; she is automatically below the current Queen Consort or Queen Regnant in the Order of Precedence.

If I am not mistaken, widows of the Sovereign's cousins are allocated the same position they would occupy had their husbands been alive. Thus, as wives of the sovereign's cousins come immediately after the Sovereign's nieces in the female Order of Precedence, the Dowager Countess comes immediately after Princess Michael:

- Queen Elizabeth (The Sovereign)
- The Duchess of Cornwall (the wife of the Sovereign's eldest son)
- The Countess of Wessex (the wife of the Sovereign's younger son)
- The Princess Royal (the Sovereign's daughter)
- The Duchess of Cambridge (the wife of the Sovereign's grandson)
- Autumn Phillips (the wife of the Sovereign's grandson)
- Princess Beatrice (the Sovereign's granddaughter)
- Princess Eugenie (the Sovereign's granddaughter)
- Lady Louise (the Sovereign's granddaughter)
- Zara Phillips (the Sovereign's granddaughter)
- Lady Serena Stanhope (Wife of the Sovereign's nephew)
- Lady Sarah Chatto (Sovereign's niece)
- Birgitte, Duchess of Gloucester (Wife of the Sovereign's cousin)
- Katharine, Duchess of Kent (Wife of the Sovereign's cousin)
- Princess Michael of Kent (Wife of the Sovereign's cousin)
- Patricia Lascelles, Countess of Harewood
- Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy (Sovereign's cousin)

It is my understanding that the Dowager Countess should have a higher precedence than her step-daughter-in-law, The Countess of Harewood since the latter is merely the wife of the son of the Sovereign's cousin - and thus not allocated a place in the Order of Precedence for female members of the Royal Family.

 

[kbk]

IMO when her husband was alive she was below Princess Michael and now continues to occupy this place, for life or until she remarries, which is very unlikely considering her age.
Artemisia, can you explain why you had any objections in her case? Her husband was a Royal cousin of the Queen in the same way as the Dukes of Gloucester and Kent and Prince Michael are. The Harewood's kinship to the Queen comes from The Princess Mary, Princess Royal. Princess Anne's children will be in the same position in the future. Will they lose they place in the Order of Precedence after the accession of William? Will a widowed Autumn Phillips lose her place?

 

[Artemisia]

IMO when her husband was alive she was below Princess Michael and now continues to occupy this place, for life or until she remarries, which is very unlikely considering her age.

That is my understanding as well.
Of course, she will also automatically lose her place in the Order of Precedence once Prince Charles ascends to the Throne.

 

[vkrish]

I had deliberately omitted the Dowager Countess from my list of Order of Precedence because I am unsure whether she, as widow of the Queen's cousin, is still included in the Order of Precedence for female members of the Royal Family...

Hi Artemisia, I have found something on Wikipedia page on BRF..

They added Earl of harewood among the "Collaterals"

The Rt Hon The Earl of Harewood, great-grandson of King George V through his daughter The Princess Mary, Princess Royal, Countess of Harewood

• His stepmother (The Dowager Countess of Harewood), wife, children, brothers, nephews, nieces and his late uncle's son and grandson

And then gave a generalised description...

The Earl of Harewood was a female-line first cousin of the Queen and acted as a Counsellor of State. The Duke of Fife, the Marquess of Milford Haven, the Countess Mountbatten of Burma, and the Lady Saltoun, and their respective families, as well as Lord Harewood's descendants, are so distant in kinship from the reigning Sovereign that they are relatives, rather than members, of the Royal Family.
None of these persons receive any money from the State or undertake official engagements on behalf of the Queen, although they remain eligible to serve as Counsellors of State. However, the Queen does invite them to private family functions and to participate in official royal occasions, such as the Trooping the Colour, the Golden Jubilee celebrations, and ceremonial or state funerals.


Nothing specific about The Dowager Countess, though...

 

[kbk]

It is my understanding that the Dowager Countess should have a higher precedence than her step-daughter-in-law, The Countess of Harewood since the latter is merely the wife of the son of the Sovereign's cousin - and thus not allocated a place in the Order of Precedence for female members of the Royal Family.

The Earl of Harewood's kinship to the Queen is now too remote to include him and his wife in the Order of Precedence among the Royal Family. However, they retain a high place in the Order, of course, but as an Earl and his wife in the Peerage of the United Kingdom only.
Since the recent death of 7th Earl, his widow, Patricia, is the only remaining member of the Lascelles family among the Royals in the Order of Precedence. Her husband was a Royal cousin of the Queen in the same way as the Dukes of Gloucester and Kent and Prince Michael are. The Harewoods' relation to the Queen comes from The Princess Mary, Princess Royal.
Princess Anne's children will be in the same position in the future. Will they lose they place in the Order of Precedence at the accession of William? Will a widowed Autumn Phillips lose her place? I think they won't. Their degree of kinship to the Sovereign will change, of course, but as his cousins coming from the Royal line, they will remain their places in the Order of Precedence among members of the Royal Family. But not in the same positions.

 

[Warren]

Wiki is often much maligned but I've never come across a more detailed listing of the [Official] Precedence in England and Wales for both Gentlemen and Ladies than that shown here.

It specifically places many members of the extended Royal Family including Lady Nicholas Windsor, Lady Frederick Windsor and Lady Gabriella Windsor.

With reference to the Dowager Countess, her late husband was the son of George V's only daughter, Mary, Princess Royal and was thus a "Royal cousin of the Sovereign" [Elizabeth II]. I doubt she would be "demoted" on her husband's death so in this case the Dowager Countess retains one small satisfaction: she may have been supplanted as Mistress of the House, she may have had to vacate the big house and move into one of the estate's dowager cottages, she may be forced to live in reduced circumstances with a smaller stipend and less personal staff, BUT due to her late husband's proximity to the Sovereign, she would, at official events, take precedence over her daughter-in-law, the Countess of Harewood. Ha! And it's something that the new Countess will never enjoy in her widowhood because the Harewood's royal proximity is limited to the Dowager Countess and will expire upon her death.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

The younger Royals, and I include the Countess of Wessex, in the family are well aware of Catherine's position and I think if anything , they will show dereference and respect to Catherine. Not the other way round. IMO

 

[kbk]

due to her late husband's proximity to the Sovereign, she would, at official events, take precedence over her daughter-in-law, the Countess of Harewood. Ha! And it's something that the new Countess will never enjoy in her widowhood because the Harewood's royal proximity is limited to the Dowager Countess and will expire upon her death.

Seriously, I don't know why she is always ommited in the discussions about the Order of Precedence, in fact having precedence over Princess Alexandra!