Protocol for a Royal Toast?

sliabh

I am trying to find out the correct thing for an Irish person to do when they are in the UK and a toast is made to the Queen (in a not too formal setting)

This happened to a friend recently at a meeting of some UK and Ireland representative bodies (the groups were from England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland). The English hosts proposed the toast and stood raising their glasses. The Irish group weren't too sure what was most appropriate so they stood but did not raise their glasses.

The Welsh raised their drinks to Liz but the Scottish had a funny approach. They held their drinks over a glass of water to signify Bonny Prince Charles, "the King over the water" :-)

So my questions is what should an Irish person do? Did my friends take the right approach?

The Corinthian

The principle should be exactly the same as standing, out of respect for another’s national anthem. Standing but not toasting was perhaps the best thing to do under the circumstances. Another alternative may have been to slightly alter the toast to the “English Queen”, given she’s not your queen.

The bottom line is that you are expected to be polite but not subservient. Leave the sneaky toasting over a glass of water to people who are still ruled by London. You are the citizen of another nation, not a former colonial back to pay his respects or to hold a grudge, so act like it.

Personally, I would consider it rather boorish to place a foreign guest into such a situation as it is forcing them to either swear fealty to a foreign head of state or to be impolite. Neither is a position that a good host should place a guest in.

kiffer

I'd say that was the way to go...
It not like you have to be a Britsh Subject to show some degrea of respect to their queen. having said that, what should a British person do here in a similar situation?

I've found that the few times I've been any where near a toast like this it was in Jersy and people shouted ,"to the Queen Our Duke!" , I would not shout that as I am in no way her subject. but you cant sit durning a toast...

Sparks

Originally posted by The Corinthian
The bottom line is that you are expected to be polite but not subservient. Leave the sneaky toasting over a glass of water to people who are still ruled by London.

The toasting over a bowl or glass of water is not "sneaky" corinthian, it's a documented tradition, the same as that which says that the Royal Navy do not have to stand for the toast, and the different variants on the toast (like the Jersey one mentioned) and the non-navy military units who do not have to stand when making the toast.

As to the original question, it's customary to stand for the toast of any foreign leader and to at least raise the glass to the lips. Of course, should such a toast take place in the presence of any other leaders, they all have to be toasted as well.

bonkey

Well, personally speaking, I'd have no objections to toasting the health of the English queen.

I've nothing against the woman, so I would see no reason not to toast her if others are.

So if I was with a group of people who wanted to toast her, I would simply use "your Queen" instead of "the Queen".

Personally, I think - as The Corinthian just referred to - that the notion of "alternate" toasts is actually just as offensive as simply deciding that you're not going to toast. I mean...you're asked to toast the Queen, and because you're Scottish you don't bother and toast Bonnie PRince Charlie instead? It may be documented tradition, but its still boils down to being a statement of "I will not toast your Queen".

jc

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Sparks
The toasting over a bowl or glass of water is not "sneaky" corinthian, it's a documented tradition, the same as that which says that the Royal Navy do not have to stand for the toast, and the different variants on the toast (like the Jersey one mentioned) and the non-navy military units who do not have to stand when making the toast.

That it is a tradition does not make it any less of a symbolic act of ‘hidden’ defiance by a subdued nation. How would it have been seen then before it became tradition?

As to the original question, it's customary to stand for the toast of any foreign leader and to at least raise the glass to the lips. Of course, should such a toast take place in the presence of any other leaders, they all have to be toasted as well.

Yes, however if the gathering is of mixed nationalities it is considered bad form not to accommodate them also, regardless of whether their leaders are present.

Sparks

Originally posted by bonkey
So if I was with a group of people who wanted to toast her, I would simply use "your Queen" instead of "the Queen".

That'd be a bit more of an insult though JC - the protocol is that the toast is "Her Majesty, the Queen" and the response is "The Queen". (It's slightly different if there is other monarchy present in the room, you actually name the monarch you're toasting).
Saying "your queen" is just a breach of protocol.

Besides, there's an Irish solution here for those that want it - the custom in england, by royal decree from the 16th century, is that you can toast with an empty glass (originally to save the officer's pockets). Whereas in Ireland, that's not the custom, toasting with an empty glass isn't the done thing - so if it bothers you, just toast with an empty glass. Both customs get satisfied.

Personally, I think - as The Corinthian just referred to - that the notion of "alternate" toasts is actually just as offensive as simply deciding that you're not going to toast. I mean...you're asked to toast the Queen, and because you're Scottish you don't bother and toast Bonnie PRince Charlie instead? It may be documented tradition, but its still boils down to being a statement of "I will not toast your Queen".

Pretty much - which is why fingerbowls are forbidden at royal banquets and officer's messes for the toast (at one time the "over the water" toast was grounds for charges of treason). On the other hand, when in scotland....

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Sparks
Saying "your queen" is just a breach of protocol.

It's not actually. It's better to avoid it, but if she's not your queen, and in particualr if you alread have a queen, it's acceptable usage. Again, a good host would avoid such a situation.

Sparks

Originally posted by The Corinthian
Yes, however if the gathering is of mixed nationalities it is considered bad form not to accommodate them also, regardless of whether their leaders are present.

Not necessarily - the toast is an english tradition, so if the english are the hosts...

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Sparks
Not necessarily - the toast is an english tradition, so if the english are the hosts...

Protocol is international, not English.

sliabh

I presume there are some internationally agreed guidelines on these things. Or at least general understandings that give people long and satisfying careers in the protocol section of the Dept of Foreign affairs.

But is there a definitive source you can turn to? Googling protocol (after you filter for the computer references) seems to turn up a load of American Military Wives sites? e.g.
http://www.airforcewives.com/protocol/ch12.html

Do they set world protocol? :-)

Victor

Originally posted by bonkey
Well, personally speaking, I'd have no objections to toasting the health of the English queen.

Neither do I, I'm just to bothered to take the effort.

Originally posted by bonkey
It may be documented tradition, but its still boils down to being a statement of "I will not toast your Queen".

I don't (nor do many others) bother toasting our own say President (unless present or relevant), so why bother doing it for someone else's?

bonkey

Originally posted by Victor
Neither do I, I'm just to bothered to take the effort. I don't (nor do many others) bother toasting our own say President (unless present or relevant), so why bother doing it for someone else's?

Because in the example being discussed, "relevant" applies to the company you would be in.

jc

Villain

I would never toast the British monarchy, why?

Because I don't like the Monarchy, not personal aginast any individual member, just don't like the monarchy, I have my reasons but not going to open a can of worms in this thread;)

The Corinthian

Originally posted by irish1
I would never toast the British monarchy, why?

Because I don't like the Monarchy, not personal aginast any individual member, just don't like the monarchy, I have my reasons but not going to open a can of worms in this thread;)

You kind of already did given that you felt overwhelmed to share your opinion to us.

On an aside, for a man who dislikes the British monarchy, it's kind of telling how you referred to it in your second paragraph, not only as the rather than just British, but also in how you emphasized its importance by capitalizing it...

...as Brendan Behan once put it; “Other people have a nationality. The Irish and the Jews have a psychosis.” :rolleyes:

Villain

Originally posted by The Corinthian
On an aside, for a man who dislikes the British monarchy, it's kind of telling how you referred to it in your second paragraph, not only as the rather than just British, but also in how you emphasized its importance by capitalizing it...

Well sorry my writing skills don't sit well with you.

Ok let me rephase it then

Because I don't like british monarchy, not personal aginast any individual member, just don't like the british monarchy.

Now how about that.

Oh and I'm far from psychosis:

"A severe mental disorder, with or without organic damage, characterized by derangement of personality and loss of contact with reality and causing deterioration of normal social functioning."

The Corinthian

Originally posted by irish1
Well sorry my writing skills don't sit well with you.

I doubt if your writing skills had anything to do with your Freudian slip:

"A verbal mistake that is thought to reveal an unconscious belief, thought, or emotion."

Mighty_Mouse

I think the point of how a group of English wouldn't think twice about putting members of a party from Wales, Scotland, Ireland in the situation is extremely relevant.

I think standing but not toasting was the 'least' confrontational approach, but again, the effin cheek of em to propose a toast to the Queen!!!!

Villain

Originally posted by The Corinthian
I doubt if your writing skills had anything to do with your Freudian slip:

"A verbal mistake that is thought to reveal an unconscious belief, thought, or emotion."

Freudian slip:rolleyes:

OMFG, man get over it I called it the monarchy instead of the british monarchy oh and i gave it a capital M :rolleyes:

Being from Ireland the only real monarchy that I have knowledge of is the british monarchy.

Sparks

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
I think standing but not toasting was the 'least' confrontational approach, but again, the effin cheek of em to propose a toast to the Queen!!!!

Technically, it's only cheek if the reciprocating toast to the President isn't made.

The Corinthian

Originally posted by irish1
OMFG, man get over it I called it the monarchy instead of the british monarchy oh and i gave it a capital M :rolleyes:

Temper, temper...

Being from Ireland the only real monarchy that I have knowledge of is the british monarchy.

Perhaps you should expand your knowledge then?

Villain

Originally posted by The Corinthian
Temper, temper...

Perhaps you should expand your knowledge then?

No thanks, history was never my favourite subject.

My temper is fine, you going about my spelling and phasing of a sentence is just sad.

Now if you have a personal problem with my likes and dislikes, let me know and we can sort it out.;)

The Corinthian

Originally posted by irish1
No thanks, history was never my favourite subject.

Apparently not. Why let the facts get in the way of patriotism after all?

My temper is fine, you going about my spelling and phasing of a sentence is just sad.

That your temper is ‘fine’ is questionable, given your responses to date. Also, I said nothing about your spelling, only your phraseology, which I considered to be quite revealing about you. You can call that sad if you wish, but I’m not the one with barely hidden hang-ups about Britain.

Now if you have a personal problem with my likes and dislikes, let me know and we can sort it out.;)

Oh, look at me quake in my boots :rolleyes:

bonkey

Gents...

take your argument elsewhere, or get back on topic.

jc

Villain

Originally posted by The Corinthian
Apparently not. Why let the facts get in the way of patriotism after all?

I know enough facts about the bristish monarchy to form my opinion, so if you wish to ellaborate what your trying to say please feel free!

Originally posted by The Corinthian

That your temper is ‘fine’ is questionable, given your responses to date. Also, I said nothing about your spelling, only your phraseology, which I considered to be quite revealing about you. You can call that sad if you wish, but I’m not the one with barely hidden hang-ups about Britain.

So you wreckon because i called it the monarchy with a capital M it reveals a lot about me :rolleyes:, now that is sad!. As for my hang ups, well thats for me to decide isn't it.

Originally posted by The Corinthian

Oh, look at me quake in my boots :rolleyes:

lol, I was simply stating that I am happy to sort any personal problems you have, you being afraid of that is your perogative:D

Victor

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
I think the point of how a group of English wouldn't think twice about putting members of a party from Wales, Scotland, Ireland in the situation is extremely relevant.

What about someone from Wales who identifies themselves as a royalist.

The Corinthian

Originally posted by irish1
I know enough facts about the bristish monarchy to form my opinion, so if you wish to ellaborate what your trying to say please feel free!

I have nothing to add and, in fairness, you’ve given nothing to detract.

I have some neighbours who are protestant and who by tradition always toast the queen at xmas dinner each year.
They are Irish citizens and live in the Republic, Its actually quite common if little known.
personally I'd raise my glass whatever the toast...
We all sit on a similar toilet tbh.


Although where Liz is concerned it helps to be on the second bottle of chianti when toasting her

MeatProduct

I think it's a bit much to toast the British queen when there are Irish, Welsh and Scottish present. Perhaps a toast to everyones health would be more appropriate and there would be no discomfort or confusion experienced by anyone.

Please gut me if I'm out of line

Nick

Mighty_Mouse

What about someone from Wales who identifies themselves as a royalist.

And what about a republican from Ireland?

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
And what about a republican from Ireland?

There are plenty of English republicans too; however Elizabeth II is their monarch and head of State. The same goes for the Welsh, Scots and (like it or not) Northern Irish - she is their head of State. If, on the other hand, the toast is made before a citizen of the Irish Republic (republican or otherwise) then the situation is identical to if it was made before a Danish subject or French citizen - it’s a foreign head of State. That’s all. Get over it.

It’s very difficult to see ourselves as an independent nation if we are still, to this day, obsessed with being seen to be even polite, let alone servile, to Britain.

Mighty_Mouse

then the situation is identical to if it was made before a Danish subject or French citizen

It's not the same due to the fact that Ireland is still occupied.

I havent argued what a person should do here. I still think that given the fact that half the world would have problems toasting the health of the queen , the english should of know better than to offer the toast.

sceptre

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
It's not the same due to the fact that Ireland is still occupied.

Took a long time to say that.

Mighty_Mouse

Took a long time to say that.

Sorry? Whats your point?

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
Sorry? Whats your point?

His point is probably that a number of individuals in this thread have been rather transparently standing behind the man, behind the man, behind the wire... :rolleyes:

As for Northern Ireland being occupied, that’s a matter open to debate - and oddly enough not the debate we’re having here. A sizable proportion of the population there would disagree with you. In addition to that, even if they were under occupation, that does not necessarily make it our beeswax either. There’s quite a few there who would be quite happy not to be occupied by either London or Dublin.

bonkey

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
It's not the same due to the fact that Ireland is still occupied.

Not in any legal sense and not according to our constitution.

jc

sovtek

Originally posted by The Corinthian
His point is probably that a number of individuals in this thread have been rather transparently standing behind the man, behind the man, behind the wire... :rolleyes:

Man, even I saw that coming.

Aside, I find it interesting this thread's gotten so much mileage.

Mighty_Mouse

His point is probably that a number of individuals in this thread have been rather transparently standing behind the man, behind the man, behind the wire...

If your hinting that you tend to know a persons response before they make it................ditto!

I meant everything in this thread so far.

As for Northern Ireland being occupied, that’s a matter open to debate - and oddly enough not the debate we’re having here

Which is why were not debating it.

addition to that, even if they were under occupation, that does not necessarily make it our beeswax either.

Your English? It is your beeswax if you propose a toast to the Queens health to an Irish republican.

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
If your hinting that you tend to know a persons response before they make it................ditto!

No, I didn’t say that.

I meant everything in this thread so far.

I’ve no doubt of that.

Which is why were not debating it.

Then don’t bring it up as fact when it is debatable.

Your English?

Are you questioning my command of the English language (“Your”) or accusing me of being English (“You’re”)? If it’s the former it is an odd accusation; the latter is both paranoid and erroneous.

It is your beeswax if you propose a toast to the Queens health to an Irish republican.

As much as toasting to the health of the pope would cause some upset at a meeting of an Orange Order lodge. On the other hand, not everyone has to live their lives with such hang-ups.

Mighty_Mouse

His point is probably that a number of individuals in this thread have been rather transparently standing behind the man, behind the man, behind the wire...

Can I ask what you meant?

Then don’t bring it up as fact when it is debatable.

Its relevant when argueing why an Englishman should't invite an Irishman to propose a toast to the queen?

that does not necessarily make it our beeswax either

Which would indicate that your an Englishman............which is also relevant to whether or not an englishman should be entitled to propose a toast to the queens health in non-english company.

As much as toasting to the health of the pope would cause some upset at a meeting of an Orange Order lodge. .

I would'nt propose a toast to the pope with an orangeman either.

On the other hand, not everyone has to live their lives with such hang-ups

Whoopee for you

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
Can I ask what you meant?

That it was obvious that some posters were approaching the topic from the usual old Tiocfaidh Ar La angle. Nothing to do with knowing your response.

Its relevant when argueing why an Englishman should't invite an Irishman to propose a toast to the queen?

It’s not. You say, NI is an occupied territory and should be part of the republic, most at this stage would say not (we even had a referendum on our national claim to NI). Meanwhile we’re an independent state. We’re not British. We don’t have to judge our actions based upon theirs any more. Get over it.

As far as I’m concerned, and I’ve already stated this, a Briton inviting any non-Briton to toast to the British head of State alone is impolite.

Which would indicate that your an Englishman............which is also relevant to whether or not an englishman should be entitled to propose a toast to the queens health in non-english company.

I’m not, in the slightest bit, English. English isn’t even my mother tongue.

Still, if I were how would that be relevant then? All part of the great English conspiracy to re-enslave the people of Ireland? :rolleyes:

TBH, your inference smacks of prejudice and extremism.

I would'nt propose a toast to the pope with an orangeman either.

You wouldn’t know an analogy either it would appear.

Whoopee for you

Yes. I’m quite happy with my lack of psychosis in the matter.

Mighty_Mouse

That it was obvious that some posters were approaching the topic from the usual old Tiocfaidh Ar La angle. Nothing to do with knowing your response.

Not some.........the comment was made to me specifically.

Is the "usual old tiocfaidh" response not presumptuous?

Meanwhile we’re an independent state. We’re not British. We don’t have to judge our actions based upon theirs any more. Get over it.

In relation to toasting the queens health or not, what’s your point?
Following the above argument, you would find it acceptable for an Englishman to invite his guests in his English home to toast the queen.

As far as I’m concerned, and I’ve already stated this, a Briton inviting any non-Briton to toast to the British head of State alone is impolite.

Ah! Now that you put it in italics...

I agree with you.

I was making the point that it was impolite for an Englishman to suggest a toast to the queen to an Irishman in particular (especially a Republican). You don't see it as any different to suggesting it to a French or German. This is where we differ.

Given the history between Ireland and England its IMO a lot different.

All part of the great English conspiracy to re-enslave the people of Ireland?

That’s exactly what I was getting at. :rolleyes: dam republicans ............always inventing conspiracy theories !!:rolleyes:

TBH, your inference smacks of prejudice and extremism.

I don't see how. Maybe it’s your own paranoia’s of republicanism coming into play here?

You wouldn’t know an analogy either it would appear.

I would

Yes. I’m quite happy with my lack of psychosis in the matter.

Is there a psychotic arguing on this thread?

kiffer

I'm going to make one post to this thread and then go to bed...

If you have guests from an other country present you toast their Head of State before your own. This is one of the unwriten writien rules...

like you never toast with an empty glass.


The other thing I'd like to say is that its a sad day when mods fill a tread with pedantisim and pick on people because of spelling and grammer to the degree that I've seen in this thread.
I know that mods are people too but the idea is that they're people who know not to stir up trouble and thats what I see in here.



* I'm not going to fix that grammer mistake, you know what I mean.

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
Is the "usual old tiocfaidh" response not presumptuous?

And accurate too.

Following the above argument, you would find it acceptable for an Englishman to invite his guests in his English home to toast the queen.

That’s not what I was saying. Read it again.

I was making the point that it was impolite for an Englishman to suggest a toast to the queen to an Irishman in particular (especially a Republican). You don't see it as any different to suggesting it to a French or German. This is where we differ.

I’d noticed that, and I’d pointed out that we differ, because you’re coming from the usual old Tiocfaidh Ar La school of thought in this matter, as if the Irish would have a divine right to hold a grudge against the English onto eternity.

Given the history between Ireland and England its IMO a lot different.

History. That’s the word. Past tense. Get over it. I listened to way too much propaganda in my childhood being spoon fed to kids that seemed to blame all of Ireland’s ills (to the present day) on England.

Frankly, if we hadn’t had a famine, we would have had to invent one.

I don't see how. Maybe it’s your own paranoia’s of republicanism coming into play here?

You implied that my stance in a discussion was somehow based upon my nationality (which you assumed to be English). That’s prejudice, not paranoia.

Is there a psychotic arguing on this thread?

I refer you to the Brendan Behan quote earlier in the thread.

Originally posted by kiffer
If you have guests from an other country present you toast their Head of State before your own. This is one of the unwriten writien rules...

I would concur.

like you never toast with an empty glass.

Ditto.

The other thing I'd like to say is that its a sad day when mods fill a tread with pedantisim and pick on people because of spelling and grammer to the degree that I've seen in this thread.

I highlighted a Freudian slip. The grammar was [edit]not[/edit] directly an issue and spelling was not at all an issue.

I know that mods are people too but the idea is that they're people who know not to stir up trouble and thats what I see in here.

On this board, I’m just another poster, just like anyone else.

Sparks

Originally posted by kiffer
like you never toast with an empty glass.

Actually, it's a written rule that you can toast the english head of state with an empty glass, or with water. As I said earlier, it dates back to the 16th century or so, and was a measure introduced to save the financial costs to officers.

kiffer

Originally posted by Sparks
Actually, it's a written rule that you can toast the english head of state with an empty glass, or with water. As I said earlier, it dates back to the 16th century or so, and was a measure introduced to save the financial costs to officers.

Yes I've seen that one too...

but at a wedding or other event you should never toast with an empty glass ... but it's more the case that before making a toast you should make sure every one has a drink so that no-one is forced to toast with an empty glass

the rule allowing empty glasses has some thing to do with cheapass Officers or some thing...

Ailill

It was very bad manners to propose a toast like that in mixed company. If I was there I would just go along with the whole thing and just forget about it. I don't really place much importance on these old formalities.

kiffer

Originally posted by The Corinthian

On this board, I’m just another poster, just like anyone else.

No, you should behave as you would expect some one on your own board to behave.

I know people should beable to act as "Person: the Mod and "Person: not mod right now" but you should still act as you would expect a good poster to act.

The Corinthian

Originally posted by kiffer
No, you should behave as you would expect some one on your own board to behave.

No, I should behave as the charter of this board dictates.

Ultimately, given that moderators act without pay, I really don't feel too inclined to be chastised by you. If you don't like that, take it to the Feedback forum, and whine there.

D

Wow you make it sound like you've sacirificed everything in being a mod. Please the reason mods become mods is because they have an interest in a particular topic and want to see good discussion about it. They are furthering their own ends. That or they are totally power hungry and this is just a stepping stone to world domination like the way the LNA board is.

The Corinthian

Originally posted by D
Wow you make it sound like you've sacirificed everything in being a mod.

No, but I've earned enough of a right not to have to listen to whinging moralists tell me what I should or should not say because I'm a mod. And as I said, if you don't like that, take it to the Feedback forum, where it belongs.