New Titles for Queen Margrethe's Descendants: 2008 & 2022, 2024

[tommy100]

Exactly! And taking your own grandchildren's last name must be completely humiliating for them. It's not only about a title.

This is my problem with the whole thing - it feels very much like this to me. Rather like how Joachim and Alexandra were treated like the Crown Prince couple when Fred was off dating and then years later Joachim was asked / encouraged to leave for Paris when the Crown Prince actually started doing more work and was married. Yes things change over time but it's starting to feel that Daisy is pretty brutal and happy to use her family as required and drop them as hard as bricks once she's done with them. Brutal IMO especially when talking about family. But each to their own. In one way its a great way for a CEO to be in business, not so much a grandmother.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

This is my problem with the whole thing - it feels very much like this to me. Rather like how Joachim and Alexandra were treated like the Crown Prince couple when Fred was off dating and then years later Joachim was asked / encouraged to leave for Paris when the Crown Prince actually started doing more work and was married. Yes things change over time but it's starting to feel that Daisy is pretty brutal and happy to use her family as required and drop them as hard as bricks once she's done with them. Brutal IMO especially when talking about family. But each to their own. In one way its a great way for a CEO to be in business, not so much a grandmother.

But she is a CEO of a more than 1000 years old firm... And as the continuation of a hereditary monarchy is the raison d'être of the institution, this was the decision she had to make.

 

[kimebear]

And as the continuation of a hereditary monarchy is the raison d'être of the institution, this was the decision she had to make.

No it wasn't. She could have just as easily decreed that Nikolai's, Felix's and Henrik's titles ( as well as Vincent's) didn't get passed on to their own children instead. Keeps the future count down and, more importantly, feathers from being ruffled. Problem solved.

 

[Viv]

That has nothing to do with her. It’s because the Danish Prince came to Greece. They aren’t Princes of Denmark; it’s a Greek title.

Correct, Fig Tree! The former Greek RF are not members of the the DRF!
(Why this ‘ of Denmark’ bit was added to the Greek titles has been
explained on several occasions, by yours truly and other Danish forum
members! )

 

[Tatiana Maria]

When the three sons of Prince Joachim would marry, they would even add more persons with the title Princess of Denmark (aside from the future spouses of their cousins Prince Christian and Prince Vincent).

Actually, it appears they would not have, as the sons would probably have lost their own Prince titles upon marriage.

Long before the announcement last autumn, many royal watchers, experts and reporters already expected that, following Danish royal tradition, Prince Joachim's children would lose their Prince(ss) to Denmark titles if and when they married Danish commoners, and perhaps even if they married foreign commoners. (Queen Margrethe II obviously gave her sons permission to keep their titles after marrying foreign commoners, in a break with tradition, but they were children and not only grandchildren of a monarch.)

This would have been nothing strange, because fully 50% of the Princes and Princesses to (of) Denmark who have married since the accession of Christian X in 1912 have lost that title when they married:

• Christian X stripped Prince Aage, Prince Erik and Prince Viggo of their HRH predicates and "to Denmark" designations due to their marriages to foreign noble (Aage) or foreign commoner (Erik and Viggo) women. He fully stripped Princess Dagmar of her royal titles due to her marriage to a Danish nobleman.
  
  
• Frederik IX liberalized enough to approve marriages to foreign noble(wo)men, but stripped Prince Oluf, Prince Flemming, Prince Ingolf and Prince Christian of all their royal titles upon their marriages to Danish commoner women.
  
  
• Margrethe II liberalized even further and approved the marriages of her two sons to foreign commoner women, but made it clear to Princess Elisabeth, who was in a twenty-year partnership with a Danish commoner until his death in 1997, that if Elisabeth married her partner she would be stripped of all her royal titles.

From another perspective:

• In the reign of Christian X, when only males had rights to the throne, three marriages of Princes to Denmark were deemed "equal" and dynastic, while three marriages of Princes to Denmark were deemed "unequal" and non-dynastic.
  
  
• In the reign of Frederik IX, two marriages of a Prince or Princess to Denmark were granted approval, while five were denied approval (I am including the marriage of Princess Benedikte, as she never fulfilled the conditions for the conditional approval, but excluding the special case of Princess Anne-Marie's marriage to a foreign king).
  
  
• In the reign of Margrethe II, three marriages of a Prince to Denmark have been approved. No unapproved marriages have been concluded up to now.

And while the practice has its roots in the outdated tradition of royals being expected to marry fellow royals, most Danish royal watchers believe that King Frederik IX (father of the present Queen) only removed titles on marriage as a convenient strategy to keep the Royal House trim, not out of any antipathy to marrying commoners. Which is why many people expected Margrethe II to follow her father's example.


After the title announcement in September, Prince Joachim's family have repeatedly stated that the removal of titles on marriage was also their expectation (before the 2022 decision). See the interviews shared by Muhler and Iolanthe earlier in this thread:


https://edition.cnn.com/2022/09/29/europe/denmark-queen-grandchildren-scli-intl/index.html

In a telephone conversation with CNN, Helle von Wildenrath Løvgreen, press secretary to Countess Alexandra, said the countess was “very sad and in shock.

“She can’t believe why and why now, because there’s no good reason. They would lose their titles anyway when they get married one day. Her sons are young men so maybe they might get married in the near future so why shouldn’t it wait until that day so that the titles would disappear on a happy day?”​

https://www.bt.dk/royale/grevinde-a...afsloerer-dronningen-har-heller-ikke-talt-med

Helle von Wildenrath Løvgreen: "Nothing has changed. They are still incredibly sad. They don't understand why.
They have always known that the day would come, because when they married their titles would disappear. As Nikolai said, it would thus happen, when he himself wanted to and it would be on a happy day.
Instead they now feel punished and as if they have done something wrong."​

 

[JR76]

No it wasn't. She could have just as easily decreed that Nikolai's, Felix's and Henrik's titles ( as well as Vincent's) didn't get passed on to their own children instead. Keeps the future count down and, more importantly, feathers from being ruffled. Problem solved.

No, it doesn't solve the perceived problem. Queen Margrethe obviously sees a problem in her grandchildren carrying royal titles while creating lives for themselves as private citizens and only preventing them from passing their titles on to their children wouldn't solve that issue for the current generation. As seen in Norway technicalities such as not being styled HRH and not using her title professionally hasn't prevented controversy since Märtha-Louise carries that title anywhere else. I also see this as a possible future problem in Sweden. HH, HRH, of Sweden or just a personal title are technicalities that goes over the head of most people.
I do think that there should have been a deeper thought behind the statement and that the future titles of descendants of the Queen should have been included. The solution that a child of the monarch is a prince/princess and that a grandchild is a count/countess being the best one in my opinion.

 

[Sidacarri]

I feel as though it's not my country and I probably shouldn't have an opinion. However my thoughts to fix this as a family is. Only the heir and spare get titles just two from each generation. So when the grandkids started arriving Nikolia and Felix Prince's, once Christian was born Felix a prince no more, once Isabella born Nikolai no more a Prince. Henrik not given a title, the twins not given a title and Athena no title. Perhaps the twins should have lost their titles as well. Just a thought and it may help the family relationships. If they are really serious about slimming the Royal family just a thought.

 

[Alisa]

Alexandra's view is very tunnel visioned. In the next 10 years from there will be a bunch of Prince/Princesses of Denmark running around for no good reason. As Nikolai has shown they risk using their titles for their own financial gain. Not a good idea.

To me the greatest tragedy is that Joachim, his wife, and ex-wife have conditioned their children to belief that if they are not a Prince or Princess they are a nobody. So sad.

 

[JR76]

To me the greatest tragedy is that Joachim, his wife, and ex-wife have conditioned their children to belief that if they are not a Prince or Princess they are a nobody. So sad.

This has been my opinion all along. If the parents hadn't made it into such a public controversy by their own actions, but handled the issue and any eventual sad feelings of their children privately they would have been able to move on much easier. Instead they put their own personal feelings about the matter before what's best for their children's feelings which has negatively affected their reputation and their relationship with their relatives.

 

[kimebear]

No, it doesn't solve the perceived problem. Queen Margrethe obviously sees a problem in her grandchildren carrying royal titles while creating lives for themselves as private citizens and only preventing them from passing their titles on to their children wouldn't solve that issue for the current generation.

Then she should have addressed this issue when her grandchildren were born. Not twenty some odd years after the fact. That's poor planning on her part as the monarch. She made a decision at the time and she should have held to it.

What did she expect? That Joachim's eldest children would be held captive at the palace upon reaching the age of majority so as not to risk doing anything embarrassing to the Crown? Of course not. The boys were raised with the knowledge that they would have to carve out careers for themselves because they were not the heirs and would not be asked to carry out royal duties.

Why strip the titles they were given at birth because they are "private citizens" when the Queen made them so herself? Were they ever offered the chance to be full time working royals? Of course they weren't. Not when Frederik has four children of his own now. Joachim's children were just expendable.

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

Exactly! And taking your own grandchildren's last name must be completely humiliating for them. It's not only about a title.

"of Denmark" is hardly comparable to a last name. I don't even think that's what's listed as the last name on their birth certificates.

I feel as though it's not my country and I probably shouldn't have an opinion. However my thoughts to fix this as a family is. Only the heir and spare get titles just two from each generation. So when the grandkids started arriving Nikolia and Felix Prince's, once Christian was born Felix a prince no more, once Isabella born Nikolai no more a Prince. Henrik not given a title, the twins not given a title and Athena no title. Perhaps the twins should have lost their titles as well. Just a thought and it may help the family relationships. If they are really serious about slimming the Royal family just a thought.

You can't argue that the twins should have their titles rescinded without also arguing that Joachim (and Marie) and Benedikte should have theirs removed as well. At the end of the day, Frederik's children are in a different category than Joachim's as the future children of the monarch.

To me the greatest tragedy is that Joachim, his wife, and ex-wife have conditioned their children to belief that if they are not a Prince or Princess they are a nobody. So sad.

I completely agree. The argument that the children's "identities have been taken away from them"... Frankly, I think they have a pretty big problem on their hands if their entire identity is built up around a title. Let alone a title they've never even used for its intended purpose – to carry out engagement on behalf of Denmark.

 

[JR76]

Then she should have addressed this issue when her grandchildren were born. Not twenty some odd years after the fact. That's poor planning on her part as the monarch. She made a decision at the time and she should have held to it.

What did she expect? That Joachim's eldest children would be held captive at the palace upon reaching the age of majority so as not to risk doing anything embarrassing to the Crown? Of course not. The boys were raised with the knowledge that they would have to carve out careers for themselves because they were not the heirs and would not be asked to carry out royal duties.

Why strip the titles they were given at birth because they are "private citizens" when the Queen made them so herself? Were they ever offered the chance to be full time working royals? Of course they weren't. Not when Frederik has four children of his own now. Joachim's children were just expendable.

At the time there was no perceived problem. Nobody could know that the Queen would have eight grandchildren and nobody could know that public opinion would change the way it has. The Danish Royal family has a century long history of titled members working for a salary and there was no indication that this couldn't continue. The Queen's cousin, Princess Elisabeth, could combine having a title and a few public engagements with having a career without anyone having a negative opinion on the matter, but times have changed. Proof of that is for instance the many negative reactions of different forum members to the modeling career of Count Nikolai.
It's easy to say that this should have been better planned and thought out, but it's hard to create solutions for problems that aren't there. There are several times when a change would have been better implemented than now and judging from what we hear from J.A.M. there must have been both discussions and a decision about a loss of titles at the time of marriage, but at the time of Nikolai's birth whatever has made this sudden change happen was obviously not an issue for his grandmother.

 

[Prinsara]

To me the greatest tragedy is that Joachim, his wife, and ex-wife have conditioned their children to belief that if they are not a Prince or Princess they are a nobody. So sad.

Rather it's "so sad" that you think there's only "Prince, Princess, or nobody". There are probably a few more things in that continuum. What about "well-treated family member", or not?

 

[kimebear]

At the time there was no perceived problem. Nobody could know that the Queen would have eight grandchildren and nobody could know that public opinion would change the way it has.

Could you point me in the direction of a public opinion poll in Denmark where the removal of the titles of Joachim's children was requested? Because, as far as I understand the general attitude of the Danish citizens according to my family and friends that live there, the general consensus was that not many really cared whether the kids kept their titles or not as they were not getting public money.

 

[GömdNatt]

Alexandra's view is very tunnel visioned. In the next 10 years from there will be a bunch of Prince/Princesses of Denmark running around for no good reason. As Nikolai has shown they risk using their titles for their own financial gain. Not a good idea.

To me the greatest tragedy is that Joachim, his wife, and ex-wife have conditioned their children to belief that if they are not a Prince or Princess they are a nobody. So sad.

Exactly.

If Nikolai and Felix were actually working for the crown, then I could see the bitterness. But they aren't even in the military. They show up for the fancy events they're invited to and otherwise, Nikolai is using his title to get modeling gigs or what have you.

Monarchy isn't what it once was. And I think a lot of the families/monarchs recognize that smaller is the better way to go. I think it's interesting that Joachim could see what was happening in Spain, Belgium (to a degree), Netherlands, Sweden, and Norway (and maybe even England) and be surprised that it could happen to his kids. I mean, what role are they going to have when Frederik is King?

Clearly Margrethe could have been a little bit more communicative, but admittedly I'm not sure I want to take Joachim at face value. But it does seem like Henrik was the communicator. Which is interesting to me. I wonder what would have come of this conversation had he stayed mentally well and lived a few years longer. Has Margrethe been thinking about this since 2004? Since Joachim's divorce? Since Henrik's birth?

I used to really like Alexandra, but some of her comments are just...entitled. Seems she and Joachim are of a like mind.

I don't really see how being a Count versus being a Prince changes life for Nikolai and Felix unless they are just trying to use Prince of Denmark as something to get their foot in the door. Surely "I'm a Count and my Grandmother is Queen of Denmark" works just the same?

It's an interesting conversation, in a lot of ways. I've just been looking at it from a purely logical way: it makes sense for the royal family to stay small. But I can see some of the anger at feeling slighted by your grandmother. Although, if you already don't have a great relationship with her, then ????

Maybe everyone involved should be taking a deep breath and talking to one another and not the press. (boy to be a fly on that wall!)

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

No it wasn't. She could have just as easily decreed that Nikolai's, Felix's and Henrik's titles ( as well as Vincent's) didn't get passed on to their own children instead. Keeps the future count down and, more importantly, feathers from being ruffled. Problem solved.

When the consideration is that it is not desirable to have individuals bearing the title Prince (Princess) of Denmark without any role in the Royal House, then action is needed to change that situation.

Apparently the idea was that it was better to correct now than still having this situation for 70 years to come, seeing the age of the four children of Prince Joachim. In every monarchy we see that situations and circumstances change.

No one could have foreseen that the Danish Royal House, for decades with only two Heirs (Frederik and Joachim) would now be able to form a sports team with successors. For the same money Prince Frederik was still a single gentleman now. Who knows? Back then it was thought wise to have this arrangement for eventual children of Prince Joachim.

 

[Prinsara]

And it's not considered politic or tasteful in the public eye to use children and recently-underage members as chess pieces: princes when you want them, demoted when you don't. Not to mention NO OTHER royal family does these "wise and justified, even though totally unforeseeable and thus impromptu" moves.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

[....] Not to mention NO OTHER royal family does these "wise and justified, even though totally unforeseeable and thus impromptu" moves. [...]

Yes they do. In 2004 the second son of Queen Beatrix lost his title Prince of the Netherlands (which was his title since birth in 1968 !) when he ceased to be a member of the Royal House.

This did not happen when his aunts Princess Irene and Princess Christina also ceased to be a member of the same Royal House (in 1964 respectively 1975).

This is another idea of how situations develop and change. By coincidence the children of said Prince Friso and his brother Prince Constantijn are in the same situation as the children of Prince Joachim: all of them now belong to the hereditary nobility with the title of Count (Countess).

 

[JR76]

And it's not considered politic or tasteful in the public eye to use children and recently-underage members as chess pieces: princes when you want them, demoted when you don't. Not to mention NO OTHER royal family does these "wise and justified, even though totally unforeseeable and thus impromptu" moves.

The grandchildren of King Carl Gustav and Alistair of Connaught, the great-grandson of Queen Victoria, lost their royal titles in 2019 and 1917 respectively due to reorganizations of their royal houses. Also in 1917 several descendants of all ages of George III were "persuaded" rather abruptly to relinquish their royal and demi-royal German titles in exchange for British peerages.

 

[Somebody]

Do those who are opposed to the queen's decision really think it was much better if they had been stripped of their title upon marriage? I am afraid that would have created quite some backlash in this day and age questioning whether the queen (or her successor king Frederik) had something personal against the bride or groom or the nephew or niece getting married. Because if not, why strip them of a title and not grant them permission to marry...

 

[JGio]

New Titles for Queen Margrethe's Descendants: 2008 & 2022

Do those who are opposed to the queen's decision really think it was much better if they had been stripped of their title upon marriage? I am afraid that would have created quite some backlash in this day and age questioning whether the queen (or her successor king Frederik) had something personal against the bride or groom or the nephew or niece getting married. Because if not, why strip them of a title and not grant them permission to marry...

I think so:

1) Better to strip their titles for the reasons you said and that happened in many families and in the past. It’s very toxic to strip their titles out of the blue “because you won’t be doing anything for the Crown in your future”. Titles should be linked to blood, not to work. -> Why am I a count and my cousins are princes? I see no reasons why this should “future-proof the monarchy”? Fewer princes doesn’t equal longer monarchy. It’s ok to limit titles but without making discriminations among peers, IMO.

2) Look at the British RF. Charles wanted a slimmed-down monarchy (still he hasn’t touched titles and I don’t think he will) and now they are barely able to cope with the workload because some major working-royals left forever. What if the DRF at some point will be very few and need to ask Joachim’s children to join for some projects and start undertaking official duties? Do they give them back their title because now they work?

3) I’ve lived in Denmark and no one cares for the title a child is given as long as she or he receives public money or harms the institution somehow.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

No, it doesn't solve the perceived problem. Queen Margrethe obviously sees a problem in her grandchildren carrying royal titles while creating lives for themselves as private citizens and only preventing them from passing their titles on to their children wouldn't solve that issue for the current generation. As seen in Norway technicalities such as not being styled HRH and not using her title professionally hasn't prevented controversy since Märtha-Louise carries that title anywhere else. I also see this as a possible future problem in Sweden. HH, HRH, of Sweden or just a personal title are technicalities that goes over the head of most people.
I do think that there should have been a deeper thought behind the statement and that the future titles of descendants of the Queen should have been included. The solution that a child of the monarch is a prince/princess and that a grandchild is a count/countess being the best one in my opinion.

Thank you for the reminder of the historical and current circumstances. In general, in royal watching discussions of the curtailments of royal privileges (titles, funding, public representation, pomp and ceremony, etc. etc.) which have become commonplace in the more populist monarchies in recent years, many royal watchers seem to assume the monarchs are slimming down for the sake of slimming down, and the external forces driving these changes are forgotten.

At the time there was no perceived problem. Nobody could know that the Queen would have eight grandchildren and nobody could know that public opinion would change the way it has. The Danish Royal family has a century long history of titled members working for a salary and there was no indication that this couldn't continue. The Queen's cousin, Princess Elisabeth, could combine having a title and a few public engagements with having a career without anyone having a negative opinion on the matter, but times have changed. Proof of that is for instance the many negative reactions of different forum members to the modeling career of Count Nikolai.
It's easy to say that this should have been better planned and thought out, but it's hard to create solutions for problems that aren't there. There are several times when a change would have been better implemented than now and judging from what we hear from J.A.M. there must have been both discussions and a decision about a loss of titles at the time of marriage, but at the time of Nikolai's birth whatever has made this sudden change happen was obviously not an issue for his grandmother.

Yes, at the time of Prince Nikolai's birth in 1999, Princess Elisabeth, who was in the same position as Nikolai, was a part-time working royal whose professional life was spent uncontroversially in the Danish foreign service. Her brothers, ex-princes Ingolf and Christian, were a farmer and a military officer, and lived largely outside the public eye. Prince Joachim was the administrator of Schackenborg estate, to which he was expected to quietly retreat when not carrying out public duties for the Crown.

The mere fact that the newborn Prince Nikolai was never likely to become a full-time working royal does not mean there was no possibility, in 1999, that he and his potential future siblings might be treated like the previous generations of cadet-branch princes and princesses and enter conventional discreet royal occupations such as the civil service, military, or farming, while carrying out occasional public duties until they married.

Could you point me in the direction of a public opinion poll in Denmark where the removal of the titles of Joachim's children was requested?

While I don't follow opinion polls in Denmark, Muhler mentioned upthread an example of the negative reaction which JR76 discussed, namely the kerfuffle over Prince Nikolai endorsing a car commercial using his princely title in 2018.

https://www.bt.dk/royale/ekspert-de...traekke-undskyldning-paa-prins-nikolais-vegne
https://www.theroyalforums.com/foru...ena-news-part-2-july-2018-2022-a-45226-6.html

Because, as far as I understand the general attitude of the Danish citizens according to my family and friends that live there, the general consensus was that not many really cared whether the kids kept their titles or not as they were not getting public money.

Yes, but public opinion is fickle. As I understand it, the general attitude of Danes when Princess Alexandra divorced was that her popularity and stellar representation of Denmark during her marriage had earned her the right to a lifetime apanage. But after only a decade or so, the negativity towards a private businesswoman receiving taxpayer funding for life developed to the point that that Countess Alexandra eventually felt forced to renounce her lawful right.

The public having little objection to non-working Princes to Denmark now, when the non-working adult princes consist of just two fresh faces working temporary jobs as photogenic models, only one of whom has stirred the occasional trivial controversy with his commercial use of his title, does not ensure they would be equally complaisant if, say, a few decades into the future there were a dozen middle-aged corporate executives who were dragging their country's name "of Denmark" into what the public perceived as exploitative business deals and messy divorces. There have been numerous examples of this in other European monarchies.

Then she should have addressed this issue when her grandchildren were born. Not twenty some odd years after the fact. That's poor planning on her part as the monarch. She made a decision at the time and she should have held to it.

The decision she made at the time was apparently, according to Countess Alexandra's press secretary, that Prince Joachim's children would keep their titles until they married, then lose it (just as the Queen made known to her cousin Princess Elisabeth that she would lose her title if she married her longterm partner Claus Hermansen).

As I asked before, would that be acceptable to you? Or would you want the Queen to allow Prince Joachim's children to retain their titles even after marrying Danish commoners, a privilege not allowed to previous generations?

 

[Somebody]

I think so:

Thanks for your response! Especially since you lived in Denmark yourself.

1) Better to strip their titles for the reasons you said and that happened in many families and in the past. It’s very toxic to strip their titles out of the blue “because you won’t be doing anything for the Crown in your future”. Titles should be linked to blood, not to work. -> Why am I a count and my cousins are princes? I see no reasons why this should “future-proof the monarchy”? Fewer princes doesn’t equal longer monarchy. It’s ok to limit titles but without making discriminations among peers, IMO.

It is linked to blood: the cousins are in a completely different position - they are not peers: they are instead comparable to Frederik (Christian) and Joachim (the others) who are princes as well.

The comparison for Joachim's children is how Vincent's children will be treated. And I don't think anyone expects them to become princes til Denmark.

2) Look at the British RF. Charles wanted a slimmed-down monarchy (still he hasn’t touched titles and I don’t think he will) and now they are barely able to cope with the workload because some major working-royals left forever. What if the DRF at some point will be very few and need to ask Joachim’s children to join for some projects and start undertaking official duties? Do they give them back their title because now they work?

Archie and Lili are still referred to as Master and Miss, so he has touched titles - although he didn't announce it. And monarchs for him did the same: remove titles from those who previously were entitled to higher/British titles.

Where is they evidence that they cannot handle the workload? It isn't too hard to adjust workload - royal work doesn't stay the same for ever.

3) I’ve lived in Denmark and no one cares for the title a child is given as long as she or he receives public money or harms the institution somehow.

What guarantees can you give that neither one of them will ever do something that might be considered harmful to the institution?

 

[Kataryn]

I am not sure I understand the key reasons for your suggested umbrage. The monarch is the font of all titles and if the Queen decides that descendants of cadet branches no longer need titles, then so be it. What is the big deal?

But that is the thing: the queen is the font of honour. The font where the honours come from. But she shouldn't be the one to take the titles from children! Especially as she is the grandmother of these children.



I understand that a lot of people think agree with her or think nothing about that. But when you compare it to other monarchies, present or former, you see this reduction in titles is seen as a punishment. And when I think about the reasons for doing so, it is clear that she want to save the main line at all costs. That gives me such a bad feeling, In fact, I had liked the queen but now I don't want to hear of her anymore. I wonder how many Danish citizens thin the same? Thinking: yes, she is our head of state but she is the grandmother fronm hell...

 

[CrownPrincessJava]

Thanks for your response! Especially since you lived in Denmark yourself.


It is linked to blood: the cousins are in a completely different position - they are not peers: they are instead comparable to Frederik (Christian) and Joachim (the others) who are princes as well.

The comparison for Joachim's children is how Vincent's children will be treated. And I don't think anyone expects them to become princes til Denmark.


Archie and Lili are still referred to as Master and Miss, so he has touched titles - although he didn't announce it. And monarchs for him did the same: remove titles from those who previously were entitled to higher/British titles.

Where is they evidence that they cannot handle the workload? It isn't too hard to adjust workload - royal work doesn't stay the same for ever.


What guarantees can you give that neither one of them will ever do something that might be considered harmful to the institution?

Archie and Lili are technically Prince/ss as they are grandchildren of the Sovereign. Harry and Meghan requested, at the time of their births that they are referred to as Master and Miss Mountbatten-Windsor. Just as Lady Louise and Viscount Severn are technically Prince/ss of Wessex.

I still do not understand QMII's logic of what she did with Joachim's children. Either make it a blanket change, I.e, only the children of the Crown Prince/ss shall have HRH Prince/ss of Denmark, or,just leave it.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Now the siblings Nikolai, Felix, Henrik and Athena all are part of the hereditary nobility of the Kingdom of Denmark. The point-of-no-return is way past and there is nothing to change anything about it.

It really was the best way to this. What is the point of making the four siblings lose their title upon marriage? It not only looks as if the choice of partner is disapproved, it also makes -for an example- young Henrik and Athena being Prince (Princess) of Denmark for many more years, knowing they would lose it anyway... No, this was the best solution for the future of the Danish monarchy, now also Prince Christian will, in a foreseeable future, start his own princely family, pushing the Joachim Clan even more to the very periphery of the Royal House.

[...]
I still do not understand QMII's logic of what she did with Joachim's children. Either make it a blanket change, I.e, only the children of the Crown Prince/ss shall have HRH Prince/ss of Denmark, or,just leave it.

Isn't that the desired outcome since New Years Day? After all now children of a King, a future King or a former King are Prince (Princess) of Denmark. Period.

 

[JGio]

New Titles for Queen Margrethe's Descendants: 2008 & 2022

Thanks for your response! Especially since you lived in Denmark yourself.

It is linked to blood: the cousins are in a completely different position - they are not peers: they are instead comparable to Frederik (Christian) and Joachim (the others) who are princes as well.

With “linked to blood” I mean they are all grandchildren of the Monarch. So, they are all peers. I see Frederick will be King at some point, but still they are all grandchildren. And allowing them to be Princes of DK until they marry is no wrong, also because they grew up with this in mind, happy with it. Now you have 4 less princes and 4 unhappy let down grandchildren who she has no contact with.

The comparison for Joachim's children is how Vincent's children will be treated. And I don't think anyone expects them to become princes til Denmark.

As said, Danes don’t care that much how many princes there are. They love the RF and, as long as public money is not “wasted” (like with Alexandra), they seem to be not bothered.

Archie and Lili are still referred to as Master and Miss, so he has touched titles - although he didn't announce it. And monarchs for him did the same: remove titles from those who previously were entitled to higher/British titles.

They are still Princes now. No decree or LP has been issued. So, he has not.

What guarantees can you give that neither one of them will ever do something that might be considered harmful to the institution?

I expect a Monarch to trust her grandchildren, not to punish them from the start to prevent any harm. That’s mean. If she wanted to avoid it, she could have decreed no titles to non future-kings’ children years ago, before any grandchild was born. Doing it retroactively is mean as well. Even if many royal families are doing it these years.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

[....]

I expect a Monarch to trust her grandchildren, not to punish them since the start to prevent any harm. That’s mean. If she wanted to avoid it, she could have decreed no titles to non future-kings’ children years ago, before any grandchild was born. Doing it retroactively is mean as well. Even if many royal families are doing it these years.

Queen Margrethe has no crystal ball. Back then in 1994 when Prince Joachim engaged to Miss Alexandra Manley, the Queen could not have foreseen how the situation would be in 2023, almost 30 years (!) later.

As said: for the same money Crown Prince Frederik was still single and unmarried now, or for the same money his union with a lady bore no fruit (no children).

Almost three decades ago it was thought wise to include the eventual children of Prince Joachim. Now not only the royal family has vastly expanded, also the world has changed: social media and smartphones in 1994? A Prince of Denmark modelling on a catwalk? Three decades ago this was unthinkable. Apparently the insight has come that going on with an extended royal family full of Princes and Princesses of Denmark was not sustainable anymore. It was thought wise to make changes to cope with vastly changing situations.

 

[kimebear]

While I don't follow opinion polls in Denmark, Muhler mentioned upthread an example of the negative reaction which JR76 discussed, namely the kerfuffle over Prince Nikolai endorsing a car commercial using his princely title in 2018.

An action by eighteen year old kid who surely asked at least his parents if not his grandmother as well before agreeing to it. Not exactly a high crime. It can't be hard to imagine that if QM had a problem with Nikolai's career choices she would have put a stop to them. I don't see either Nikolai or Felix continuing with the modeling if they knew it would result in their little brother and sister losing their titles.

Yes, but public opinion is fickle. As I understand it, the general attitude of Danes when Princess Alexandra divorced was that her popularity and stellar representation of Denmark during her marriage had earned her the right to a lifetime apanage. But after only a decade or so, the negativity towards a private businesswoman receiving taxpayer funding for life developed to the point that that Countess Alexandra eventually felt forced to renounce her lawful right.

That reaction had more to do with her sons getting older and a wave of dislike for her second husband. You're comparing apples and oranges.

The decision she made at the time was apparently, according to Countess Alexandra's press secretary, that Prince Joachim's children would keep their titles until they married, then lose it (just as the Queen made known to her cousin Princess Elisabeth that she would lose her title if she married her longterm partner Claus Hermansen).

As I asked before, would that be acceptable to you? Or would you want the Queen to allow Prince Joachim's children to retain their titles even after marrying Danish commoners, a privilege not allowed to previous generations?

Yes it would be. When there is so much precedent in a certain situation then there is no stigma attached. Stripping Joachim's children of the titles that were their birthright without any precedent singles them out, especially with no mention of it happening to other children of second born sons of the monarch in the future.

If QM was so set on this course of action, then she needed to set the terms equally for all of her descendants, which she simply didn't.

 

[Mbruno]

Do those who are opposed to the queen's decision really think it was much better if they had been stripped of their title upon marriage? I am afraid that would have created quite some backlash in this day and age questioning whether the queen (or her successor king Frederik) had something personal against the bride or groom or the nephew or niece getting married. Because if not, why strip them of a title and not grant them permission to marry...

After Joachim and Frederik were given permission to marry unequally, I don't see how the Queen could justify not giving the same permission to Nikolai and Felix if they asked for the Queen's consent. A possible difference could be that Nikolai or Felix might want to marry a Danish woman, but how would the Danish public now react to permission to a royal marriage not being granted because the bride is Danish?