Order of Precedence 1: Ending 2022

[kbk]

Right, but he likely was representing his father at the ceremony by laying the wreath after The Queen and The Duke. William is next in-line, which definitely means there are occasions where he is expected to outrank his uncles as a future King.

According to the Court Circular, Lord Guthrie was acting on behalf of the Prince of Wales and Prince Michael of Kent was acting on behalf of the Duke of Kent and William was there on his own.
That's an interesting question by the way. Let's say there is an occassion where the Earl of Wessex is present on his own and Prince Michael as the Queen's representative acting "on her behalf" also there. Does Prince Michael's status at the event change his rank? I don't think so. Thus, during the said Remembrance Day Services in Westminster this year, Field Marshal Lord Guthrie, acting in the name of the Prince of Wales, laid his wreath after Prince Michael.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

Right, but he likely was representing his father at the ceremony by laying the wreath after The Queen and The Duke. William is next in-line, which definitely means there are occasions where he is expected to outrank his uncles as a future King.

I guess but a senior member of the armed services placed (actually he tossed it lol) a wreath on behalf of the Prince of Wales. William was laying his own personal wreath.

 

[AdmirerUS]

Re: William's OOP - I just don't think the Royal Family is into the "who goes first" precedents the way they used to be. It's in keeping with the way the "CORE" family has been seen recently on the balcony, vs, all the gang.

I think the family is willing to bend to public interest in the order to proceed into an event (depending on the event). When there are rules for who goes first when your dad is/is not here, when you are a son of the ruler/brother of the ruler, a girl/a boy, a woman with/without your spouse, one whose parents took the TRH/one whose parent eschews TRH, when your dad does/does not send a proxy, etc. I think the public gets a bit turned off.

I think the Royal Family has learned that. Weddings and State visits are one thing - the rest are mainly photo ops.

 

[kbk]

Males come before females is correct. Alexandra's father, The Prince George, took precedence ahead of his sister, The Princess Royal. Their children's precedence continues down similar lines.

Alexandra is a male-line grandchild of George V and takes precedence ahead of her cousin, The Earl of Harewood, who was a female-line grandson of The King.

The Order of Precedence is totally based on people's relations to the current Sovereign and not his or her precedessors. It's true that the Princess Royal was outranked by her brothers but this relation had nothing to do with the situation of the current Queen's first cousins coming from her royal line. Of course, they come in the order of dynastic seniority but generally, male first cousins of the Sovereign come before female ones. And their wives take their precedence.

 

[NGalitzine]

I cannot imagine a scenario where the Queen would allow Lord Harewoods widow to have precedence over Princess Alexandra. We know that in all female events HM places those born HRH Princess ahead of those who married an HRH Prince so a Dowager Countess, widow of a son of the Queens aunt does not seem to fit ahead of HRH Princess Alexandra.

 

[kbk]

What situation are you talking about? A private occassion or a state one? Princess Alexandra's coming before the Princesses by marriage is only a matter of private precedence. Formally, she is the most junior princess of the realm as all princesses by marriage outrank her simply because their husbands outrank Princess Alexandra herself. All their status, titles and precedence too come from their husbands and Princess Alexandra has it all on her own and by birth but it does not change the strict rules of the official Order of Precedence.
I cannot imagine the Dowager Countess attending a state banquet too, for example, as her family went so much apart from the everyday life of the first line Royals decades ago. Thus, our discussion here is purely theoretic. The Late Earl was not a full member of the Royal Family in the same way as the Phillipses are not now. But, formally he had an official status and precedence in the realm because of the proximity of his blood ties to the Queen. Just be more throughtfull in our disputes here and let's not forget about him and his widow.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

I think HM would not embarrass her sons with a new order of precedence but she has let it 'be known' that the Duke of Cambridge outranks his uncles in public.
I come to this opinion because I have yet to see evidence to the contrary.

On a side note. Anyone have an explanation as to why The Earl and Countess of Wessex paused to allow the Duchess of Cambridge to walk in front of them while entering one of HM's garden parties this past summer?
The Duke of Cambridge did not attend but yet it appeared to me they were showing deference to Catherine.

 

[AdmirerUS]

I think HM would not embarrass her sons with a new order of precedence but she has let it 'be known' that the Duke of Cambridge outranks his uncles in public.
I come to this opinion because I have yet to see evidence to the contrary.

On a side note. Anyone have an explanation as to why The Earl and Countess of Wessex paused to allow the Duchess of Cambridge to walk in front of them while entering one of HM's garden parties this past summer?
The Duke of Cambridge did not attend but yet it appeared to me they were showing deference to Catherine.

As I noted below - I think in small ceremonies of not great circumstance, that the monarchy is evolving OOP (or not caring about it). I think it is a nod to what the public sees as fitting. It is along the lines of the monarchy no longer expecting curtseys - and letting people know that can do as they feel appropriate.

And welcome back Duke of Earl!

 

[NGalitzine]

. Just be more throughtfull in our disputes here and let's not forget about him and his widow.

I have no idea what your comment is in reference to. i was merely asking for some clarification.
Remember HM dropped The Earl and his second wife from the court guest list at one time, even refusing him an invitation to events such as the funeral of their mutual uncle the Duke of Windsor and the wedding of Princess Anne. It was sometime before he was welcomed into the fold again.
As I recall at later events that he attended he was always seated/placed after the HRHs. He certainly never walked with members of the royal family when they made their entrances into the abbey or St Pauls for weddings or jubilees. That is why I find it hard to understand why people seem to believe that Patricia Harewood should have place and precedence as the widow of a female line descendent of George V over a male line descendent of George V such as Alexandra.
Anyway it doesnt really matter one way or the other since in practice such precedence is never likely to come into play but again i was just asking for clarification. Sorry if you felt I was stepping on someones toes.

 

[branchg]

Branchg, could you put some reference to that there is a differentiation between the first cousins of the Sovereign from the royal line of male-line and those coming from a female-line, like the Lascelleses?
Do the York girls take precedence ahead of Peter Phillips because they are male-line and he is female-? No, because he is a male and that is what matters here.

Beatrice and Eugenie do take precedence ahead of Peter because they are the daughters of a son of The Sovereign. As male-line grandchildren, they are HRH and Princesses, whereas he is not.

What matters is the line of descent from a Sovereign. The male-line takes precedence over the female and holds royal rank.

 

[yvr girl]

Right, but he likely was representing his father at the ceremony by laying the wreath after The Queen and The Duke. William is next in-line, which definitely means there are occasions where he is expected to outrank his uncles as a future King.

Actually, William was not representing his father. I watched the whole ceremony. An officer laid a wreath on behalf of Prince Charles (I don't recall his name.) but he did so after all the members of the royal family.

 

[NGalitzine]

^^^^
The officer in question was Lord Guthrie, former Defence Chief, who laid the wreath on behalf of the Prince of Wales.

 

[kbk]

Beatrice and Eugenie do take precedence ahead of Peter because they are the daughters of a son of The Sovereign. As male-line grandchildren, they are HRH and Princesses, whereas he is not.

What matters is the line of descent from a Sovereign. The male-line takes precedence over the female and holds royal rank.

What matters is the degree of kinship to the Sovereign and not the line of descent from a Sovereign. Of course, among persons with the same degree of kinship, let's say from the same class, ie granddaughters of the Sovereign, dynastic seniority is applied. But generally, grandson of the Sovereign come before his or her granddaughters. Thus, Peter Phillips outranks his York cousins. As the son of Princess Royal, the lowest-rank child of the Queen, he ranks after the other 3 grandsons of EII immediately after Lord Severn.

 

[branchg]

What matters is the degree of kinship to the Sovereign and not the line of descent from a Sovereign. Of course, among persons with the same degree of kinship, let's say from the same class, ie granddaughters of the Sovereign, dynastic seniority is applied. But generally, grandson of the Sovereign come before his or her granddaughters. Thus, Peter Phillips outranks his York cousins. As the son of Princess Royal, the lowest-rank child of the Queen, he ranks after the other 3 grandsons of EII immediately after Lord Severn.

Peter is a female-line grandson and takes his precedence from Anne's place. The Duke of York and The Earl of Wessex both come before Anne as sons of The Sovereign and their children take precedence ahead of Anne's. The line of succession determines your degree of seniority.

 

[yvr girl]

Peter is a female-line grandson and takes his precedence from Anne's place. The Duke of York and The Earl of Wessex both come before Anne as sons of The Sovereign and their children take precedence ahead of Anne's. The line of succession determines your degree of seniority.

Not entirely. When you see the Royal Family in formal situations, they are usually grouped as families...the children sit with their parents. Wales', Yorks' Wessexes and the family of the Princess Royal.

Grandsons and their wives do come before granddaughters.

 

[branchg]

Male-line grandchildren come before female-line grandchildren as HRH. Always.

 

[kbk]

Male-line grandchildren come before female-line grandchildren as HRH. Always.

Grandsons come before all granddaughters because of their sex. And then in the "class" of grandsons, those who are male-line, thus HRHs and Princes, naturally take precedence before those who are female-line and non-Royal by style and title. The same applies to the Sovereign's granddaughters and other classes of people in the Order of Precedence, like brothers, sisters, nephews, nieces, first cousins, etc., etc., ranked first by their common degree of kinship to the Sovereign and then by their dynastic seniority (similiar order that makes up the line of succession to the throne). The second rule makes, for example, the Duke of Gloucester taking precedence before the Duke of Kent, who is 9 years older than him.

 

[Molly2101]

I don't think we ever see true precedence anymore, which is a bit of a shame really.

As yvr_girl said, normally the children sit with their parents, regardless of their precedence. At St Paul's in June this year for the Diamond Jubilee Service, Peter and Zara sat with Anne in the front row. They did not, however, process up the aisle with the others but when the family walked out Peter and Zara took their place behind their mother. Louise walked with Edward and Sophie because she is under age, thus she takes the precedence of her father. Although (arguably) legally a Princess of Great Britain, when she turns 18 she and James will likely do similar to that of Peter and Zara. They wont participate in processions at the beginning of events, like their Phillips' cousins, but they will walk out behind their parents. It was the same for the Royal wedding, Peter and Zara arrived with the other family members on buses but they processed out of the abbey with the rest of the senior members. I am guessing this simply because they will not be using their HRH style.

I guess we wont see precedence perhaps until the funeral of Prince Philip or the Queen. It is one of those occasions where again the entire family will be there. At The Queen Mother's funeral, Zara processed up the aisle along with her cousins Beatrice and Eugenie. They took senior precedence though, followed by Sophie and then Zara and Tim. At the Queen's funeral I imagine it will be a similar situation as the men will likely walk behind the coffin, and the women will gather at the Abbey. This time, of course, we will have the additions of Louise, Catherine, Camilla and Autumn (and possibly James, depending on how old he is and if he walks behind the coffin.) I assume Autumn will walk up with her sister-in-law as Tim walked beside Sophie at the Queen Mother's funeral.

Would it be something like this:

Camilla
Catherine
Possibly Harry's spouse
Beatrice
Eugenie
Louise
Sophie
Autumn
Zara

and so forth? I exclude Anne as she will likely walk behind the coffin.

 

[branchg]

Grandsons come before all granddaughters because of their sex. And then in the "class" of grandsons, those who are male-line, thus HRHs and Princes, naturally take precedence before those who are female-line and non-Royal by style and title. The same applies to the Sovereign's granddaughters and other classes of people in the Order of Precedence, like brothers, sisters, nephews, nieces, first cousins, etc., etc., ranked first by their common degree of kinship to the Sovereign and then by their dynastic seniority (similiar order that makes up the line of succession to the throne). The second rule makes, for example, the Duke of Gloucester taking precedence before the Duke of Kent, who is 9 years older than him.

They do not. Princesses come before non-royal male grandchildren who are female-line descendants.

 

[kbk]

They do not. Princesses come before non-royal male grandchildren who are female-line descendants.

Could you cite a proper source for your opinion here?

 

[branchg]

Could you cite a proper source for your opinion here?

It's not an opinion, but fact, as I have already referenced throughout this thread. Daughters of Sons of The Sovereign take precedence ahead of Sons of Daughters of The Sovereign. Beatrice and Eugenie are ahead of Peter Phillips in the line of succession as male-line granddaughters, just as The Duke of York takes precedence ahead of The Princess Royal.

This is why male-line grandchildren are HRH while female-line grandchildren are not.

 

[kbk]

It's not an opinion, but fact, as I have already referenced throughout this thread. Daughters of Sons of The Sovereign take precedence ahead of Sons of Daughters of The Sovereign. Beatrice and Eugenie are ahead of Peter Phillips in the line of succession as male-line granddaughters, just as The Duke of York takes precedence ahead of The Princess Royal.

This is why male-line grandchildren are HRH while female-line grandchildren are not.

I completely don't understand your point now. I think you are confusing here the order of precedence with the order of succession to the throne! With an addition of the Letters Patent of 1917 and general rules of dynastic seniority...
Again, could you recite your source?

 

[COUNTESS]

I completely don't understand your point now. I think you are confusing here the order of precedence with the order of succession to the throne! With an addition of the Letters Patent of 1917 and general rules of dynastic seniority...
Again, could you recite your source?

Look, it is the BRF's own rules, biting them in the rear end. The Duchess of Windsor was not a HRH, by their standards, because of her past. If you use the logic of "to whom you are married" she was. She had precedence. Camilla has, some what the same role. As a very bright woman, she choose not to style herself, POW, as her popular, predecessor, but DOC. She has done a good job and is smart. I don't think she care at all, but Charles is obsessed with protocol and station, but not as his mother's thoughts have evolved.

 

[PssKatie]

It's not an opinion, but fact, as I have already referenced throughout this thread. Daughters of Sons of The Sovereign take precedence ahead of Sons of Daughters of The Sovereign. Beatrice and Eugenie are ahead of Peter Phillips in the line of succession as male-line granddaughters, just as The Duke of York takes precedence ahead of The Princess Royal.

This is why male-line grandchildren are HRH while female-line grandchildren are not.

In the female Order of Precedence, wives of grandsons of the sovereign come ahead of granddaughters of the sovereign. Thus, Autumn Phillips has precedence over Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie. If Autumn has precedence over Beatrice and Eugenie, obviously Peter does as well.

 

[Grandma828]

If males are present the males ruless apply.

 

[Kit]

Does this mean that Kate with William will have precedence over Camilla without Charles?

 

[Artemisia]

That appears to be the general consensus among those well-versed in the precedence rules - that Kate would outrank Camilla via William if William is present but Charles is not. If Charles is present than Camilla always outranks Kate, and the same is true if both their husbands are absent.

I have to say though that the first case (Kate outranking Camilla if only William is present) is one aspect of precedence that I find a bit hard to understand.

 

[Kit]

Thanks Artemisia. I do not really understand it either to be honest.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

Seems consistent with the way the BRF operates. If William outranks Camilla, then it only makes sense that when Catherine is with William, she takes her husband's status and therefore outranks Camilla (sans Charles)

 

[Artemisia]

Seems consistent with the way the BRF operates. If William outranks Camilla, then it only makes sense that when Catherine is with William, she takes her husband's status and therefore outranks Camilla (sans Charles)

Yes but does William outranks Camilla?
Camilla is the wife of the Heir Apparent and I don't see how William could outrank her, even if he is the future King.