Members of the Royal Family and Line of Succession - Broadest Sense

[Somebody]

Wouldn't the husbands and children of the younger daughters also be Princes and Princesses in this scenario, given that Princess Benedikte's husband was offered a princely title if he would agree to move to Denmark?

Probably - although Richard himself already was a prince of SWB by birth; I took the other Scandinavian royal families as example (in accordance with the timing of the change); neither Ari Behn nor Chris O'Neill is a prince.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Probably - although Richard himself already was a prince of SWB by birth; I took the other Scandinavian royal families as example (in accordance with the timing of the change); neither Ari Behn nor Chris O'Neill is a prince.

I see what you mean. On the other hand, Chris O'Neill's situation is similar to Richard in that he would have become a prince had he agreed to relocate to Sweden (and in his case, renounce his commercial ventures). As for the Norwegian royal family, I am not sure the Danes would follow their example as the former is much more slimmed down. In Norway the king's daughter is not a member of the Royal House and her children are untitled, whereas in Denmark not only is the queen's younger son a member of the Royal House but so are his children.

 

[Somebody]

I see what you mean. On the other hand, Chris O'Neill's situation is similar to Richard in that he would have become a prince had he agreed to relocate to Sweden (and in his case, renounce his commercial ventures). As for the Norwegian royal family, I am not sure the Danes would follow their example as the former is much more slimmed down. In Norway the king's daughter is not a member of the Royal House and her children are untitled, whereas in Denmark not only is the queen's younger son a member of the Royal House but so are his children.

Chris was offered to take up the ducal titles of his wife not to become a prince. Jonas was planning to do so but Chris indeed decided differently.

Joachim's children are indeed members of the royal house and titled as their father is titled and the titles pass on in male-line. There isn't really a comparable situation for Denmark as of yet (Anne Marie married a foreign king and therefore seized to be a formal member of the Danish royal family - and Benedikte remained a member but her children didn't - do we know what their titles would have been had they decided to live in Denmark? Still prince(ss) of S-W-B or of Denmark?

So, Sweden is the closest comparison we have imo. And as the Danes don't do ducal titles, my guess would be no princely titles for husbands of princesses (at least yet - when they got married in the late 90s and early 2000s). We will find out how they will approach this in the future when Isabella and Josephine are getting married.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Chris was offered to take up the ducal titles of his wife not to become a prince. [...]

Do you have a source for this? I am aware of the announcement regarding Jonas Bergström, but official spokespersons and Chris O'Neill himself (in an interview in 2018) have talked of his refusal to become a prince.

Joachim's children are indeed members of the royal house and titled as their father is titled and the titles pass on in male-line. There isn't really a comparable situation for Denmark as of yet (Anne Marie married a foreign king and therefore seized to be a formal member of the Danish royal family - and Benedikte remained a member but her children didn't - do we know what their titles would have been had they decided to live in Denmark? Still prince(ss) of S-W-B or of Denmark?

At least we know that her husband could have become a Prince of Denmark, as he has discussed his reasons for refusing:

About his rejection of a Danish princely title:

"I never regretted, and I never took the proposal seriously. Neither did I take it seriously when it was suggested from Danish quarters that I should give up Berleburg and settle in Denmark. I spat out a ‘No’ as fast as I could."

 

[gerry]

A friend has moved to northern Ontario and today followed a bike trail on land formerly owned by Canadian lumber baron (not titled, merely moneyed!) JR Booth. This name rang a royal bell in my memory and yes, indeed had Booth's daughter Lois married a Prince Erik of Denmark. Attached is the story,but I wonder where this prince who became a California chicken farmer (an idea for Meghan Sussex?) fits into the Danish royal family tree. Muhler, here is your cue!
https://todayinottawashistory.wordpress.com/tag/frances-lois-booth/

 

[Muhler]

What a commotion!

Great reporting, it's like being there in person.

Here is a photo of Count Erik of Rosenborg: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/Count_Erik_of_Rosenborg.jpg

And the estate they lived in in DK, Bjergbygård: https://www.danskeherregaarde.dk/uploads/kobenhavnstur-20---23juni-2011-070_bo.jpg

The article says she lived there with her new husband after divorcing Count Erik. Count Erik is listed as the owner of the estate from 1931-42. (The estate BTW is from 1230.) It would have been extremely generous of Count Erik to allow his ex-wife and her new husband, with whom she clearly had a relationship with prior to the divorce, to live there.
Even though Count Erik was son of one of the most colorful characters within the DRF for the past 200 years, Princess Marie of Orleans, and may have inherited his parents liberal views, that's probably taking it a bit far.

As for Bjergbygård. The name indicates that Count Erik was not considered a member of the DRF when he took over in 1931, otherwise the name would have been Bjergbygård Slot. (Slot in DK is used about estates, palaces and castles affiliated with the DRF.)
But times were hard during WWII, and it's interesting seeing who took over the estate, Fritz Løvenskiold. The Løvenskiold family is a wealthy, predominantly Norwegian noble family, who owned (owns?) several estates in DK. They took over Bjergbygård in 1942, and sold it in 1946. I.e. as soon as possible after WWII. - To me that suggests that Count Erik perhaps did a Schackenborg.

But as to Count Erik's place in the family tree: Haven't really checked but it must be a very distant branch by now. After all he ceased being a member of the DRF when he married Frances Lois Booth. But since several members of the DRF were present at the marriage and he was allowed to keep his title as prince and HH, the connection was obviously not frowned upon.

 

[Blog Real]

Are Princess Benedikte's sons in the line of succession?

 

[An Ard Ri]

No as far as I'm aware Princess Benedikte’s children are not in the line of succession as they don't reside in Denmark.

 

[Mbruno]

Are Princess Benedikte's sons in the line of succession?

The official position is that they are not in the line of succession because they were not raised in Denmark.


Interestingly, the Danish Act of Sucession, unlike its Swedish counterpart, does not contain any clause, I think, that explicitly requires that people in the line of succession be raised in the country. However, again the official position is that King Frederik IX's consent to Princess Benedikte's marriage included a condition that her children be raised in Denmark to retain their succession rights.


Whereas marriages without the King's consent imply loss of succession rights under the Act of Succession, it is unclear whether the King has the constitutional power to give "conditional consent" or to impose additional requirements, e.g. on the way children from the marriage are raised, as a condition for the issue of the marriage and their respective descendants to retain succession rights. As such, a minority of scholars dispute the exclusion of Princess Benedikte's descendants, but I guess the controversy is mostly irrelevant in practice since they would be way down in the line of succession anyway. One practical effect for them though is that they are deprived of the title/style of Prince/Princess of Denmark.


The situation of the offspring from Queen Anne Marie's marriage is less controversial since they are all (again implicitly) excluded, including Anne Marie herself, for being Greek Orthodox whereas the Danish constitution requires that the King be a member of the Evangelical Lutheran Church.

 

[Stefan]

The situation of the offspring from Queen Anne Marie's marriage is less controversial since they are all (again implicitly) excluded, including Anne Marie herself, for being Greek Orthodox whereas the Danish constitution requires that the King be a member of the Evangelical Lutheran Church.

It the religion Issue only a requirement since 1953. Before that the descendants of King George I. of Greece where in the danish line of sueccsion but after the descendants of his younger brother Valdemar.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

For the royal watchers who have said they are disappointed about the male-line descendants of the counts of Oldenburg losing the Danish throne after Crown Prince Frederik's accession, who is seen as the "correct" agnatic heir to the Danish throne in the generation after Queen Margrethe II? (Count Ingolf is childless and the same age as the queen.)


Edit: I have asked about the parallel scenario in relation to the Spanish throne in its own thread.

 

[Stefan]

For the royal watchers who have said they are disappointed about the male-line descendants of the counts of Oldenburg losing the Danish throne after Crown Prince Frederik's accession, who is seen as the "correct" agnatic heir to the Danish throne in the generation after Queen Margrethe II? (Count Ingolf is childless and the same age as the queen.)


Edit: I have asked about the parallel scenario in relation to the Spanish throne in its own thread.

That should be Count Ulrik of Rosenborg and his son Count Philipp. Count Ulrik is the son of Count Oluf, born Prince of Denmark, younger son of Prince Harald. He lost his succession rights when he married a commoner in 1948.

 

[Prinsara]

Why not Haakon in Norway?

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Averting a union of crowns would be one possible reason, which I wondered about.

On a related question: Was Prince Knud only understandably upset that the adoption of the 1953 Act of Succession would displace the existing heirs (himself and his oldest son) who had the expectation of becoming kings, or was he also displeased with women having rights to the throne? That is, would he have been upset if a granddaughter of his was to become Queen of Denmark following himself and his sons?

 

[JR76]

Averting a union of crowns would be one possible reason, which I wondered about.



On a related question: Was Prince Knud only understandably upset that the adoption of the 1953 Act of Succession would displace the existing heirs (himself and his oldest son) who had the expectation of becoming kings, or was he also displeased with women having rights to the throne? That is, would he have been upset if a granddaughter of his was to become Queen of Denmark following himself and his sons?

The Prince felt obligated to formally protest in Council for the sake of his sons. After that formal protest was logged he did nothing to stop the change to the Order of Succession. Both because he knew he couldn't stop it and out of respect for the will of the people. The formal protest goes: - "I anledningen af at regeringen i dag i statsrådet har fremsat et lovforslag, der tilsigter at ændre de i tronfølgeloven af 31. juli 1853 indeholdte arveregler, ønsker jeg at udtale, at en sådan ændring efter min opfattelse er i strid med de traktater og overenskomster, der danner det retlige grundlag for tronfølgeloven. På mine sønners og egne vegne må jeg derfor anmode om, at mit skriftlige forbehold herimod må blive fremlagt til statsrådets protokol".

"On the occasion that the Government has today submitted a bill to the Council of State which intends to amend the rules of succession contained in the Succession Act of 31 July 1853, I would like to state that such an amendment is in my opinion contrary to the treaties and agreements which forms the legal basis for the Succession Act. On behalf of my sons and myself, I must therefore request that my written reservation to this effect be submitted to the minutes of the Council of State".

One of his granddaughters has said that both her grandparents were conservative (politically and morally) and very strict so one could speculate that Knud would argue that as long as there was a male heir to the throne, he should go before any female like it had happened during the extinction of the old Oldenburg line.

 

[Prinsara]

Averting a union of crowns would be one possible reason, which I wondered about.

The crowns can be easily not-united by giving it to Sverre Magnus if that’s so. Right?

 

[Tatiana Maria]

The Prince felt obligated to formally protest in Council for the sake of his sons. After that formal protest was logged he did nothing to stop the change to the Order of Succession. Both because he knew he couldn't stop it and out of respect for the will of the people. The formal protest goes: - "I anledningen af at regeringen i dag i statsrådet har fremsat et lovforslag, der tilsigter at ændre de i tronfølgeloven af 31. juli 1853 indeholdte arveregler, ønsker jeg at udtale, at en sådan ændring efter min opfattelse er i strid med de traktater og overenskomster, der danner det retlige grundlag for tronfølgeloven. På mine sønners og egne vegne må jeg derfor anmode om, at mit skriftlige forbehold herimod må blive fremlagt til statsrådets protokol".

"On the occasion that the Government has today submitted a bill to the Council of State which intends to amend the rules of succession contained in the Succession Act of 31 July 1853, I would like to state that such an amendment is in my opinion contrary to the treaties and agreements which forms the legal basis for the Succession Act. On behalf of my sons and myself, I must therefore request that my written reservation to this effect be submitted to the minutes of the Council of State".

One of his granddaughters has said that both her grandparents were conservative (politically and morally) and very strict so one could speculate that Knud would argue that as long as there was a male heir to the throne, he should go before any female like it had happened during the extinction of the old Oldenburg line.

Thanks. It is interesting to see that Prince Knud's protest cited the treaties which formed the basis for the 1853 Act of Succession, just as his appeal to Stalin on the issue apparently cited the international agreements at the Congress of Vienna.

It is true that there were treaties with Russia and other European nations concerning the Danish succession in the 19th century, but did those treaties remain legally binding in 1953? If so (I haven't seen the treaties) would they mandate male succession in perpetuity as Knud suggested, or would the conditions be satisfied provided the succession continued to follow the descendants of Christian IX? In practice, whatever the 19th-century treaties state, it is hard to imagine Stalin, Churchill, et al even thinking of intervening on Prince Knud's behalf. But it might be interesting to see what the conclusion would be if one of the male-line Rosenborgs were to sue to claim the Danish throne.

ETA: It is also interesting that he protested on behalf of his teenage sons; does that indicate they shared their father's views?

The crowns can be easily not-united by giving it to Sverre Magnus if that’s so. Right?

Theoretically, but I assume that the people who want Queen Margrethe II to be followed by an agnatic relative instead of her son would also want Sverre Magnus to inherit the Norwegian throne instead of his sister.

 

[JR76]

Thanks. It is interesting to see that Prince Knud's protest cited the treaties which formed the basis for the 1853 Act of Succession, just as his appeal to Stalin on the issue apparently cited the international agreements at the Congress of Vienna.



It is true that there were treaties with Russia and other European nations concerning the Danish succession in the 19th century, but did those treaties remain legally binding in 1953? If so (I haven't seen the treaties) would they mandate male succession in perpetuity as Knud suggested, or would the conditions be satisfied provided the succession continued to follow the descendants of Christian IX? In practice, whatever the 19th-century treaties state, it is hard to imagine Stalin, Churchill, et al even thinking of intervening on Prince Knud's behalf. But it might be interesting to see what the conclusion would be if one of the male-line Rosenborgs were to sue to claim the Danish throne.



ETA: It is also interesting that he protested on behalf of his teenage sons; does that indicate they shared their father's views?









Theoretically, but I assume that the people who want Queen Margrethe II to be followed by an agnatic relative instead of her son would also want Sverre Magnus to inherit the Norwegian throne instead of his sister.

To my knowledge the Russian emperors were only involved in questions regarding the Danish succession in a roundabout way since it affected their previous dynastic holdings in the Duchy of Holstein-Gottorp and because of their, after the extinction of the Danish Royal line, position of seniority within the House of Oldenburg. Even if Stalin rightly ignored Knud's plea (which was a surprise to me) I wonder if it was the Head of State of Russia who had a say on the issue or the heir to the dukes of Holstein-Gottorp? If you understand what I mean?