I apologize in advance for this - I can see now that I got to rambling...
: Edit: Is the caption right about the Queen's : highest personal order of merit?
LittleMo says this is a question of what you mean by "highest", but it seems like you might also have to define "personal" (and maybe "merit" too). Currently the British Monarchy website does not list the honours in order of precedence, but instead seemingly by how well-known they are to the general public. However, there are a few orders which are described as being "in the sovereign's own personal gift." They are:
The Garter The Thistle The Order of Merit The Royal Victorian Order The Royal Family Order of Elizabeth II
I don't think many people would question that the Order of the Garter is the highest order in the UK, but: "in the sovereign's personal gift" (meaning she has the final word in the decision) - is that personal enough? Personally, I would rule out the top 3 on the list for not being personal enough The first two are too historical and the appointments too important to be strictly personal (although some of the members are her friends), and the Order of Merit has a name that's a purposeful declaration of being non-personal and strictly merit-based. I call the RVO personal because it's stated mission both at it's founding and today is to award personal service to the sovereign or the monarchy, and as for the Family Order, my view is a decoration that can only be given to family members is about as personal as it can get
While I agree that the Family Order is a tradition, and nobody ever talks about it as an order of "merit" (and Mr. Sainty did not put it under the heading "Orders of Merit"), I'd like to argue that there might possibly be an element of merit, or perceived merit, to it in recent times. I think perhaps Princess Anne was the last to begin wearing a Family Order according to the established tradition, in conjunction with her entrance into society, for the purpose of properly accessorizing and looking the part of a princess. Nowadays, though, things are different, and new female family members do not receive the order automatically anymore - there seems to be a bit of a "waiting period" first. It's not so far-fetched to imagine that it might be time to "prove" oneself, and it adds some sense of personal-ness to the tradition as well - there was commentary when Camilla first appeared wearing the order, that it was a sign of the Queen's approval, like she had got a good review at the office...
I remember that conversation some time ago about the finite number of portraits, but I think it was determined that there were at least 8 portraits made in 1952, and there are 6 ladies wearing them today, which means at least two are available - Catherine has not worn one yet since her marriage, and Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie have not been seen wearing them. Obviously we don't know anything, but to me, even seeming to earn them is as good a reason why as any...
So for me (personally) it's a question of which is "higher", the RVO or the Family Order?
I believe the list above (with the RVO higher) shows the correct order of precedence because this is how the British Monarchy website used to list them (along with all the other ones in between and after), and because they are also listed in this order on other websites. For instance "Medals of the World" http://www.medals.org.uk/united-kingdom/united-kingdom-ribbons.htm, which also lists historical/dormant orders as well as other types of decorations, all in the order of precedence used by the respective countries. Also, on Wikipedia (I know...) at the bottom of the page for the Family Order, there's a list of other UK orders, seemingly in order of precedence. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Family_Order_of_Queen_Elizabeth_II
In addition to this, I just strained my back getting down Guy Stair Sainty's exhaustive World Orders of Knighthood and Merit (in two heavy volumes), and there is a section where the countries are listed alphabetically "with their orders listed in precedence". Mr. Sainty edited this book for Burke's Peerage over several years with cooperation from almost every nation in the world (he also wrote a number of the articles himself - I highly recommend it, if you are interested in this sort of thing). Under "United Kingdom" the orders are listed in the same order as on the two websites above, but omitting the Royal Victorian Chain, the Order of St. John, and the Royal Family Order - All three are described in other chapters of the book, but do not even appear on this list. It's kind of interesting, since all three are decorations that do not confer any special precedence.
They seem to be outside the usual system, so it's hard to guess how the royal family view the ranks of these orders in relation to all the orders that do confer precedence, but one clue might be in the Queen's choice to award the Family Order to Camilla first, and the GCVO later - this is the same pattern she followed with all the previous royal brides who received more that one decoration, and seems like it fits in with a larger trend of gradually "promoting" family members through the various honours which has some exceptions (like Princes Phillip, Charles and William, who all received the Garter before any other orders), but is the general rule in most other cases...
You say it's not personal and not an order of merit, I say it's not the highest - I'm going to go out on a limb and say the caption has some flaws
on November 19, 2013, 12:07 am, in reply to "
The first two are too historical and the appointments too important to be strictly personal (although some of the members are her friends), and the Order of Merit has a name that's a purposeful declaration of being non-personal and strictly merit-based. I call the RVO personal because it's stated mission both at it's founding and today is to award personal service to the sovereign or the monarchy, and as for the Family Order, my view is a decoration that can only be given to family members is about as personal as it can get