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

[Tatiana Maria]

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.

I did not say it was a high crime. I said it was an example of the recent uptick in negative public opinions about these matters which JR76 discussed in the post about which you were asking:

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.

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.

I don't think I was making a comparison. My point was that public opinion is fickle, and given that her sons growing older and her remarriage were both entirely foreseeable at the time when public opinion advocated for her to be granted a lifetime appanage, I don't think those factors disprove the fickleness of public opinion.

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.

That is what I was curious to know, thanks.

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?

She could also justify it by the fact that they are not children of a monarch and not HRHs. There is so far no precedent for an HH or a member of a cadet branch being permitted to marry a commoner and remain Prince to Denmark.

Out of curiosity, how likely is it that, if they marry, Prince Joachim's children might marry a noble or royal?

 

[kimebear]

I did not say it was a high crime. I said it was an example of the recent uptick in negative public opinions about these matters which JR76 discussed in the post about which you were asking:

There is always a bit of grumbling from the public about just about everything and anything. It doesn't mean that you have to throw the baby out with the bathwater. There was no huge outcry at the time for Nikolai to lose his title, so to do it five years later seems a bit ridiculous.

I don't think I was making a comparison. My point was that public opinion is fickle, and given that her sons growing older and her remarriage were both entirely foreseeable at the time when public opinion advocated for her to be granted a lifetime appanage, I don't think those factors disprove the fickleness of public opinion.

Again, people tend to have stronger reactions when their money is involved, which it wasn't the case here. Joachim's children having titles cost the Danish public nothing.

She could also justify it by the fact that they are not children of a monarch and not HRHs. There is so far no precedent for an HH or a member of a cadet branch being permitted to marry a commoner and remain Prince to Denmark.

Then she should have also worded the announcement to include the children of Vincent and any other patrilineal HH descendants, but she didn't. She left the door open for Frederik to allow all of his sons' children to retain their titles, which is a slight against Joachim's children.

Out of curiosity, how likely is it that, if they marry, Prince Joachim's children might marry a noble or royal?

As neither son of QM married a noble and yet kept their titles, that point is moot. QM just seems to keep moving the goalposts around when it comes to keeping and losing titles. It's all a bit irratic really.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Then she should have also worded the announcement to include the children of Vincent and any other patrilineal HH descendants, but she didn't. She left the door open for Frederik to allow all of his sons' children to retain their titles, which is a slight against Joachim's children.

As neither son of QM married a noble and yet kept their titles, that point is moot. QM just seems to keep moving the goalposts around when it comes to keeping and losing titles. It's all a bit irratic really.

If you read the quoted post from Mbruno, you will see that he and I were discussing the justification of the original plan to remove titles upon marriage, which you stated would be acceptable. There was no public announcement of that plan.

My response to him also addressed the point about Margrethe II's sons, which he also raised.

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

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.

They are not. Joachim's children will never be children of the monarch. Which makes Frederik's children peers of Benedikte and Joachim.

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.

I don't know where you've got that idea but that's definitely not a general sentiment among Danes

You're correct that right now most people wouldn't care if Joachim's kids stayed princes and princess. I very much doubt that sentiment would extend to 8 x spouses and children so in that sense it's misleading to claim that we don't care how many princes and princesses we have.

I'm also not sure people would necessarily continue to feel that they were entitled to their princely titles. As Tatiana Maria rightly pointed out, the public opinion is fickle. It's difficult enough having to "monitor" Frederik's kids in terms of what ends up on social media, what they inadvertently end up advertising etc. Doubling that up to include Joachim's children is a lot of work. What the public feels right now in this exact moment is not guaranteed to last, it only takes a couple of poor choices to end up on the wrong side of the general public. Nikolai and Felix's own mother can attest to that.

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.

I think I can say with a 100% certainty that he most definitely did not. QMII and Joachim both know that such explicit advertisement is a big no-no – as evident by the DRF's immediate apology afterwards.

And no, I don't think Nikolai meant any harm by doing it but it's monitoring like that he and his siblings will now be free from. And I have no doubt that's what QMII means when she says they'll be free from the limitations of the princely titles.

 

[JR76]

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.

I think I can say with a 100% certainty that he most definitely did not. QMII and Joachim both know that such explicit advertisement is a big no-no – as evident by the DRF's immediate apology afterwards.

If then Prince Nikolai had anchored the sponsorship with the court, his grandmother or his parents there would not have been a need to take swift action and publicly denounce his actions, make him give the car back and apologize. It was not a serious mistake he made, but it shows that he didn't understand where to draw the line. To be honest I too struggle to see the difference with promoting a car firm and modelling for Burberry and Dior.

 

[kimebear]

I think I can say with a 100% certainty that he most definitely did not. QMII and Joachim both know that such explicit advertisement is a big no-no – as evident by the DRF's immediate apology afterwards.
\

No one can say with 100% certainty except for the royal family themselves. It could have been a matter of Nikolai being given consent by his parents and the public reaction being stronger than originally thought, so the palace PR office went into protection mode.

To be honest I too struggle to see the difference with promoting a car firm and modelling for Burberry and Dior.

Perhaps QM should have given her grandchildren more explicit instructions on their public careers then, if what Nikolai and Felix are doing to earn money is so problematic for the royal image. In Britain, Edward and Sophie had a career misstep early on that caused quite the scandal and yet they retained their titles. It all blew over eventually.

 

[Kataryn]

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.

Imagine princesse Marie pregnant with her third child. Would it be a prince/ss or a count/ess?

 

[Prinsara]

Perhaps QM should have given her grandchildren more explicit instructions on their public careers then, if what Nikolai and Felix are doing to earn money is so problematic for the royal image. In Britain, Edward and Sophie had a career misstep early on that caused quite the scandal and yet they retained their titles. It all blew over eventually.

Nikolai is on record as saying his grandmother thought what he was doing was exciting and she liked to hear about it. There is certainly no "stop doing this, I don't approve, I wish you weren't using your title" implied there. At all.

Again, I don't know why there is a need to imagine Nikolai "brought this on himself", other than reassurance that the Queen's decision was correct and well-executed.

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

No one can say with 100% certainty except for the royal family themselves. It could have been a matter of Nikolai being given consent by his parents and the public reaction being stronger than originally thought, so the palace PR office went into protection mode.

Come on now. A lot can be said about QMII and Joachim but neither of them are dense. While Nikolai can be excused on the basis of his inexperience, QMII and Joachim are both fully aware that members of the royal family aren't allowed to be used as advertising columns. Arguing that either of them would have consented to a "Prince Nikolai uses [brand]" advertisement is a slight to both of their intellect.

If then Prince Nikolai had anchored the sponsorship with the court, his grandmother or his parents there would not have been a need to take swift action and publicly denounce his actions, make him give the car back and apologize. It was not a serious mistake he made, but it shows that he didn't understand where to draw the line. To be honest I too struggle to see the difference with promoting a car firm and modelling for Burberry and Dior.

Exactly this!

At the time, I remember that the double standards of apologising for the car advert while allowing him to "advertise" for high-end fashion houses. I don't blame him for being confused! But it's this kind of monitoring and pedantry he will now be liberated from.

 

[Prinsara]

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.

— This was not a reorganization of the house. It only applied to Joachim's children. No one else, and no future instances were specified.
— Whether Sweden counts as one or not, nearly everyone has mentioned that was seemingly the wise, ideal way to do this, and it did not appear impromptu at all.
— Not only was 1917 more than a century ago and a completely different culture (and Tatiana Maria has pointed out it's questionable if Alistair of Connaught was ever officially recognized as a prince by George V), there was a vicious world war and massive social unrest and xenophobia with violent consequences going on, so at least slightly more justification for sudden changes than the current randomness.

 

[ppetrica]

— Not only was 1917 more than a century ago and a completely different culture (and Tatiana Maria has pointed out it's questionable if Alistair of Connaught was ever officially recognized as a prince by George V), there was a vicious world war and massive social unrest and xenophobia with violent consequences going on, so at least slightly more justification for sudden changes than the current randomness.

2022. and 2023. are not that much different. We who live in Europe currently have Putin, a dangerous war in our neighbourhood that effects us all, constant threats of spreading the war and being nuked, huge energy crisis and inflation (much worse then in US or Canada), cost of living crisis, millions of illegal migrants from Middle East and Africa, rise of xenophobia, ultra-left and ultra-right movements,... Every age has it's threats.
But people's perception of monarchy in 1917. and people's perception of monarchy in 2022. are two very different things. Slimmed down monarchy is what most of people currently see as a way to go forward.

 

[JGio]

They are not. Joachim's children will never be children of the monarch. Which makes Frederik's children be peers of Benedikte and Joachim.

I’ve never said that.

 

[iceflower]

Off topic posts about members of the British Royal Family have been removed.
Please try to focus on the Danish Royal Family's titles, comparisons can be helpful but should not wander off the topic.

 

[JGio]

Are you stating that modeling for Dior or Burberry is a way to sponsor a brand? It’s a considerable stretch to make. Instead, being Count of Monpezat and modeling is not a sponsorship to your eyes?

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

I don't know who you're replying to but I'm gonna assume it's me And no, what I'm saying is that modelling is advertising a brand. I don't think that's a stretch at all.

Being a Count of Monpezat and modelling is indeed also advertising but a Count of Monpezat also isn't bound by the regulations that are in place for a Prince to Denmark. Therein lies the difference.

I’ve never said that.

Well, in your post that I quoted, you claimed that Frederik and Joachim's children are peers as grandchildren of the monarch. That is what I opposed as, although they're all grandchildren of the monarch, they're not equals given that 4 will also be children of the monarch and the other 4 will not ?

I understand disagreeing with the decision to remove the titles but the argument "why am I a count, when my cousin's a prince" simply doesn't make sense. By the same logic, Isabella could say "why is my brother gonna be Crown Prince and I'll just stay a Princess?" It's a misconceived idea of equality because they're all from the same generation and because primogeniture, especially as obvious an example as this one, is inherently unfair but that's how it's always been. A lower-ranking title doesn't mean anyone's loved any less.

 

[JGio]

Well, in your post that I quoted, you claimed that Frederik and Joachim's children are peers as grandchildren of the monarch. That is what I opposed as, although they're all grandchildren of the monarch, they're not equals given that 4 will also be children of the monarch and the other 4 will not ?



I understand disagreeing with the decision to remove the titles but the argument "why am I a count, when my cousin's a prince" simply doesn't make sense. By the same logic, Isabella could say "why is my brother gonna be Crown Prince and I'll just stay a Princess?" It's a misconceived idea of equality because they're all from the same generation and because primogeniture, especially as obvious an example as this one, is inherently unfair but that's how it's always been. A lower-ranking title doesn't mean anyone's loved any less.

I see your point. I think we all have different perceptions of titles and who should be titled. It can be a never ending discussion [emoji2]. But to me, all male-line grandchildren of a monarch should be Princes/ss. Anyway it’s very nice to your points.

 

[CyrilVladisla]

Will the press occasionally refer to Nikolai as Prince Nikolai and refer to Felix as Prince Felix?

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Will the press occasionally refer to Nikolai as Prince Nikolai and refer to Felix as Prince Felix?

In due time they will be balding married men with dad bods and the media will then be preoccupied with the young family of the future King Christian. Today's newspaper is tomorrow's underlayer for the cat's litter box.

 

[windemere]

I wonder if perhaps the parents (Joachim, Alexandra, and Marie) aren't more upset about the loss of the princely/princess titles than the children (Nikolai, Felix, Henrik and Athena) themselves are. And the newspapers, magazines, TV, etc. are surely doing all they can to exaggerate and overdramatize the situation.

The Greve af / Komtesse af (Count/Countess of) Monpezat titles are very respectable ones that reflect Nikolai's, Felix's, Henrik's, and Athena's paternal heritage. They are young and healthy and will very likely pursue careers that they are interested in. Nikolai, Felix, and Henrik wll be able to pass the title down to their own descendants. That is something that they can take pride in. Young people their age are very resilient, and have the optimism of youth. They'll very soon get over the loss of the titles. Maybe they already have. It's the parents who are likely to perhaps nurse some grudges over what happened.

 

[Javaward]

The Greve af / Komtesse af (Count/Countess of) Monpezat titles are very respectable ones that reflect Nikolai's, Felix's, Henrik's, and Athena's paternal heritage.

I think this is ultimately about their "name" rather than the title for title sake, but of course I could be totally wrong...

...They'll very soon get over the loss of the titles. Maybe they already have. It's the parents who are likely to perhaps nurse some grudges over what happened.

This I seriously doubt - especially for the older two.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Many comments here recurrently claim that this reorganization/demotion is a one-off which will apply only to Prince Joachim's children, leaving the door open for Prince Vincent's possible future children to be HH Princess/Prince to Denmark. But that claim is contradicted by all the evidence presented to us so far.


A) The original announcement of the decision stated:

"In April 2008, Her Majesty The Queen bestowed upon her sons, their spouses and their descendants the titles of count and countess of Monpezat. In May 2016, it was also announced that His Royal Highness Prince Christian, as the only one of The Queen’s grandchildren, is expected to receive an annuity from the state as an adult.

As a natural extension of this, Her Majesty has decided that, as of 1 January 2023, His Royal Highness Prince Joachim’s descendants can only use their titles as counts and countess of Monpezat [...]"

https://www.kongehuset.dk/en/news/changes-in-titles-and-forms-of-address-in-the-royal-family​

Thus, the 2022 decision was expressly an extension of a 2008 decision which applied to all the descendants of Queen Margrethe II and a 2016 decision which applied to all the grandchildren of Queen Margrethe II other than Christian.

The logical inference is that, since it is an "extension" of two previous decisions which each applied to Frederik's descendants (minus Christian) as well as Joachim's descendants, the 2022 streamlining decision will likewise apply to both Frederik's and Joachim's descendants (minus Christian).


B) Crown Prince Frederik (who indeed may be King by the time any children of Vincent are born) and Crown Princess Mary reacted to the controversy with statements which cast serious doubt on the claim that Vincent's children may or will be made Princesses/Princes: the Crown Prince stating that he too is interested in keeping the Royal House lean, and the Crown Princess stating that even their children (despite being one degree senior to Joachim's children) may have their own titles reconsidered in the future:

Mary has given a statement:

https://www.bt.dk/royale/kronprinsesse-mary-til-bt-vi-kommer-ogsaa-til-at-se-paa-vores-boerns-titler


Video included.

A very quick translation of the quotes in the text:
"Change can be immeasurably difficult and it can be really painful. I think most have tried that/been through that.

But that doesn't mean that the decision isn't the right one. We will also have to look at the title of our children, when it's time for that."

Q: Does that also mean that Your (formal) children can also lose the titles of prince and princesses?

"We cannot see today how the DRF will look like when it's Christian's time or when Christian's time is approaching."

During an engagement at a school in Copenhagen today, October 27, Crown Prince Frederik was asked to comment on the title decision, he replied:

"It is sad to see how affected he (Prince Joachim) has been by the decision. Of course it makes an impression on the other brother. His only (brother). And my only one (..) But then Her Majesty, my mother, has made a decision which is hers alone. And I understand that. And of course I myself am interested in the Danish monarchy being renewed or at least staying lean over time"


** BB: Kronprins Frederik bryder tavsheden efter Margrethes beslutning: Det er trist **

From their comments, there would seem to be more chance of Vincent losing his own princely title than passing it down to a future child of his.


C) In the many comments from Prince Joachim, Princess Marie, Countess Alexandra, then Prince Nikolai, and their spokeswoman Helle von Wildenrath Løvgreen, who have given plenty of detailed criticisms of the decision, none of them have given any indication that Vincent's potential children may be treated any differently from Joachim's children. If that were the expectation, they would surely have disclosed it in the same manner that they disclosed, for example, the lack of communication from their mother/mother-in-law/grandmother, as it would bolster their case that they have been "ostracized".


D) I have the impression that (correct me if I am wrong) this expectation for Vincent's children to be Princes/Princesses is exclusive to foreign royal watchers. None of the comments from Danes I have seen (including those who are very harshly disapproving of the decision and the Queen) have included this suggestion that Vincent's children may be treated differently from Joachim's.


There are very reasonable and legitimate arguments against the Queen's decision to demote her grandchildren at this time. But it is neither necessary nor just to accuse her of doing something which, from all the facts available, she has not done.





As for the complaints that the Queen did not explicitly mention Vincent or future generations in the announcement:

First, given that the family and the Danish public appear to understand that this is not planned to be an exception but the new rule, it seems that was already communicated effectively with the existing wording.

Second, to repeat what I wrote in an earlier post: With all due respect, the argument that the press release ought to have explicitly stated that the same changes would apply to the children of Vincent / the children of Isabella, Vincent and Josephine seems to fly in the face of other arguments which have been made on this board:

1) In discussions about British royal titles that took place before the death of Queen Elizabeth II, many argued that it would be meaningless, inappropriate and/or disrespectful to Elizabeth to publish various announcements about plans for titles during Charles' reign while she was still alive. It is likely that the grandchildren of Crown Prince Frederik will not be born until the future reign of Frederik X, so by the same logic, would it not also be inappropriate to make announcements about their titles during the reign of Queen Margrethe II?

2) In the past, many posters who asked questions about, say, how future husbands of various young princesses might be titled have been accused of assuming that those princesses will have husbands. Again, by the same logic, wouldn't an announcement about the future titles of Vincent et al's children be unfairly assuming that they will have children?

While I do not personally agree with these arguments, it is surprising that they have not been raised here after being repeatedly brought up in a number of previous discussions.

 

[JR76]

Will the press occasionally refer to Nikolai as Prince Nikolai and refer to Felix as Prince Felix?

From what I've seen so far the media has consistently used their comital titles.

 

[valeas]

Like so many things and increasingly on royal matters in the next generation nobody will care about this title-gate. If monarchy is still existing the CP will be a prince/ss and siblings will either not be styled a prince/ss from beginning or loose it when turning 18(last option which wouldn't make much sense).
Don't want to start a discussion about politics or climate change, but hej guys we now and much more in coming years have other problems than how some nobility calls themselves and remember this is only a name/title.

slap af (chill)

 

[King of the Jungle]

To remove a name from a person who has used it all their life is cruel.
It would have made no difference at all for Nikolai and Felix to have kept being Princes - as they were at birth.
They could have still used their newer title or their grandfather's surname or made up their own alias.
It should be their personal choice, as adults, to be known by a name with which they identify best.

The new directive could have altered the name of those not born yet.
Removing the HRH or what perks they are entitled to - that is a different thing and fair enough to modernise.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

To remove a name from a person who has used it all their life is cruel.
It would have made no difference at all for Nikolai and Felix to have kept being Princes - as they were at birth.
They could have still used their newer title or their grandfather's surname or made up their own alias.
It should be their personal choice, as adults, to be known by a name with which they identify best.

The new directive could have altered the name of those not born yet.
Removing the HRH or what perks they are entitled to - that is a different thing and fair enough to modernise.

It is not just a name. It is a title of the Royal House.
As it is seen as desirable that a more limited group (children of a (future) King exclusively) bear a title of the Royal House, the decision had to be taken, somehow, somewhen.

And they have their paternal surname with -finally- a real, legal and recognized hereditary noble title, ending the questionable pretension by the De Laborde de Monpezats that they would belong to French Nobility indeed.

Nothing "cruel" about it. When Prince Christian starts to have his own family with a fresh new load of Princes and Princesses of Denmark, these Joachim siblings will be even more pushed to the remote periphery of the royal family. They have to pursue their own life and career, completely outside the Royal House. Then it is only wise not to have a title of said Royal House.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

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.

Could you specify which move you believe has been done by no other royal family?

Stripping royal titles from their adult bearers? As I already mentioned a couple of times in this thread, it was done by King Juan Carlos I of Spain to many adult and teenage members of his family who had enjoyed royal titles under Francisco Franco's dictatorship when he executed his royal decree in 1987 by limiting recognition of royal titles in legal documents to the titles recognized in the decree, i.e., the titles which he and previous heads of the royal house had personally permitted. And while Nikolai of Denmark was "only" 23, Emanuela de Dampierre was already 74 years old when her nephew stripped her of her Franco-recognized Spanish HRH.

Stripping royal titles at a "random" moment? On the face of it, the timing of Juan Carlos's 1987 royal decree, and the concurrent stripping of royal titles which fell afoul of its stipulations, was senseless. It was already 12 years since General Franco's death, and there were no royal weddings or births taking place then. (The rumor is that the decree was precipitated by rumors that one of his HRH cousins was about to marry an actress.)

By the way: I cannot help but notice that for all the criticism of Juan Carlos on this forum (and others), very few people have commented negatively on his move, in contrast to Margrethe's. I wonder why that is.

Dictating or causing family dysfunction with poor execution of the title decision? A serious and well-informed political journalist, Martine Dubuisson, reported that Belgian King Philippe's 2015 decision that his siblings' grandchildren would not be Princesses/Princes "of Belgium" (even though their legitimate male-line grandchildren at least would remain plain Princesses/Princes) incited stormy arguments between Philippe and his sister and brother. Unless one disbelieves the reports (and I see no reason to), Philippe also imposed his decision on his family without their consent, and they simply chose not to make their arguments public as Margrethe's family has. And that may very well be the case in other monarchies as well.

I expect a Monarch to trust her grandchildren, not to punish them from the start to prevent any harm. That’s mean.

Prevention is different than punishment, though, and while the tactic of waiting until actual harm occurs and then stripping titles as punishment from the royal who is harming the institution may seem fairer, it has its disadvantages. It would mean that harm had already occurred by the time something was done. It also has the potential to be extremely unfair, because the royal who harmed the institution may not actually have done anything to deserve punishment. As we have seen in numerous royal families, royals too can be subjected to false accusations and biased assessments. For all we know, something as innocent as Nikolai and Felix evolving from handsome young models into average-looking middle-aged businessmen might have spurred on unfair (but still harmful to the institution) accusations of being spoiled hangers-on leeching off of their princely titles, like so many other royals have received.

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?

I think you post you responded to was referring to the family's comments on the Prince and Princess titles, not their treatment as family members by their mother/grandmother.

Titles should be linked to blood, not to work.

But to me, all male-line grandchildren of a monarch should be Princes/ss.

Female-line grandchildren are as much blood grandchildren of a monarch as male-line grandchildren.

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.

HM does have the prerogative to reverse her own decision, though I don't expect she will unless there is a drastic change of circumstance.

 

[Mbruno]

To remove a name from a person who has used it all their life is cruel.
It would have made no difference at all for Nikolai and Felix to have kept being Princes - as they were at birth. They could have still used their newer title or their grandfather's surname or made up their own alias. It should be their personal choice, as adults, to be known by a name with which they identify best.

The new directive could have altered the name of those not born yet.
Removing the HRH or what perks they are entitled to - that is a different thing and fair enough to modernise.

They were never HRHs, only HHs. And, as far as I know, they had no (official) perks. Nikolai, however, did use his title commercially as a model and, in a much publicized hotel commercial, he was once incorrectly cited as an HRH. I believe the Queen's main goal was to give the boys freedom to pursue their careers in the private sector without entangling those careers with royal titles. It had been long decided that Joachim's children would not be working royals and would not have public funding, so they would need to have jobs to make a living anyway.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

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

To remove a name from a person who has used it all their life is cruel. [...]
It should be their personal choice, as adults, to be known by a name with which they identify best.

The problem is that "to Denmark", or in English "of Denmark", is not only the unofficial last name (legally, they bear no last name) of the Princes and Princesses to Denmark, but the name of the country and the name of the royal house as well. Questions about the usage of the name of Denmark are not only about the personal identities of the queen's family members, but the representation of the Danish people, state, and monarchy.

It would have been better, as I see it, to adopt the example of many other European monarchies and have the members of the royal house employ the name of the dynasty instead of the country for private purposes (e.g., Bernadotte for the Swedes). That would not solve the issue of the name being identified with the royal house, but at least it would remove the immediate identification of the country and the public with the commercial and other unofficial activities of their royal family members.

On the subject of names, it seems that in BT's December 15, 2022 interview with Countess Alexandra's family spokesperson Helle von Wildenrath Løvgreen (of which parts were published as an article on BT's website and translated by Muhler here), she also indicated that Princes Nikolai and Felix would rather take the name of Frederiksborg than Monpezat. There is a post on the Royal Dish forum by the poster Larzen which gives the following summary of her comments:

In BTs podcast kongehuset bak kuliserne, there is an interview with alexandras spokesperson Helle von… she says that there has been no communications between Margrethe/Frederik/Mary with Nikolai and Felix pr desember 15th. She also says there is now dialogue about another title for the children who wants a danish name in their passport, they want the same title as their mother count of Fredriksborg. Montpezat sounds French and they feel danish.

It seems BT does not provide transcripts for Kongehuset bag kulissen, and I have failed to find a quotation of Ms. von Wildenrath Løvgreen's comments regarding the names. Are there are any listeners of the podcast here who could give more detail? Her comments raise questions to me. With whom were the princes in dialogue, if there were no communications with their grandmother the queen? And why share their wish with the media but not contact the Queen to put the request to her?

That said, I hope if it is a serious wish, and if the counts communicate it to their grandmother someday, that she will agree to it. While Monpezat may be part of a legal Danish title, it remains the name of a fiefdom in France, not Denmark, and it is a name taken from the family of a recently married in consort, not from the royal lineage. It is the equivalent of grandchildren of Frederik and Mary being named Donaldson.

In addition, being known as counts of Frederiksborg would enable them to share their name with a living parent (an issue raised by Joachim and Marie) and not only use the maiden name of a deceased grandparent. There is also precedent as Nikolai has called himself Nikolai Frederiksborg on social media.

 

[Mbruno]

The problem is that "to Denmark", or in English "of Denmark", is not only the unofficial last name (legally, they bear no last name) of the Princes and Princesses to Denmark, but the name of the country and the name of the royal house as well. Questions about the usage of the name of Denmark are not only about the personal identities of the queen's family members, but the representation of the Danish people, state, and monarchy.

It would have been better, as I see it, to adopt the example of many other European monarchies and have the members of the royal house employ the name of the dynasty instead of the country for private purposes (e.g., Bernadotte for the Swedes). That would not solve the issue of the name being identified with the royal house, but at least it would remove the immediate identification of the country and the public with the commercial and other unofficial activities of their royal family members.

On the subject of names, it seems that in BT's December 15, 2022 interview with Countess Alexandra's family spokesperson Helle von Wildenrath Løvgreen (of which parts were published as an article on BT's website and translated by Muhler here), she also indicated that Princes Nikolai and Felix would rather take the name of Frederiksborg than Monpezat. There is a post on the Royal Dish forum by the poster Larzen which gives the following summary of her comments:



It seems BT does not provide transcripts for Kongehuset bag kulissen, and I have failed to find a quotation of Ms. von Wildenrath Løvgreen's comments regarding the names. Are there are any listeners of the podcast here who could give more detail? Her comments raise questions to me. With whom were the princes in dialogue, if there were no communications with their grandmother the queen? And why share their wish with the media but not contact the Queen to put the request to her?

That said, I hope if it is a serious wish, and if the counts communicate it to their grandmother someday, that she will agree to it. While Monpezat may be part of a legal Danish title, it remains the name of a fiefdom in France, not Denmark, and it is a name taken from the family of a recently married in consort, not from the royal lineage. It is the equivalent of grandchildren of Frederik and Mary being named Donaldson.

In addition, being known as counts of Frederiksborg would enable them to share their name with a living parent (an issue raised by Joachim and Marie) and not only use the maiden name of a deceased grandparent. There is also precedent as Nikolai has called himself Nikolai Frederiksborg on social media.

But is "of Frederiksborg" a name? I thought that was the territorial designation of a title, rather than a name. If they wanted to take their mother's family name, they should be known as Nikolai and Felix Manley in my opinion.

"De Monpezat" on th other hand is a patrilineal family name. It is actually their paternal grandfather's name. I am pretty sure that, when QMII gave Henri's paternal descendants the title of "greve/komtesse af Monpezat",, she was indirectly addressing Henri's grievances about his descendants not bearing his name.

I don't think Nikolai and Felix can legally be "Counts of Frederiksborg" either, as that is a personal and non-transmissible title granted to the former Princess Alexandra. Their professional accounts now refer to them as "Count xxx of Monpezat".

 

[Tatiana Maria]

But is "of Frederiksborg" a name? I thought that was the territorial designation of a title, rather than a name. If they wanted to take their mother's family name, they should be known as Nikolai and Felix Manley in my opinion.
[...]
I don't think Nikolai and Felix can legally be "Counts of Frederiksborg" either, as that is a personal and non-transmissible title granted to the former Princess Alexandra. Their professional accounts now refer to them as "Count xxx of Monpezat".

The form of Danish noble titles is analogous to the Benelux or Swedish systems, which vary from the Spanish or British systems. In a technical sense, the title of a titled Danish noble is simply Count/Countess or Baron/Baroness. The "designation" is their surname.

That is why, for instance, the married daughters and female-line grandchildren of Queen Margrethe II's cousin Count Christian of Rosenborg are "of Rosenborg" but, at least officially, are not Countess/Count. The laws of surnames applicable to "of Rosenborg" are now gender-neutral, but the rules of nobility titles applicable to "Count/Countess" continue to follow the old patrilineal definition of family.


From the press release announcing the creation of Alexandra as Grevinde af Rosenborg, my guess is that followed the usual form: The press release specified her title and name. Although there is room for doubt, as I suppose "name" could also refer to her forenames.

Prinsesse Alexandras fulde titel og navn vil herefter aktuelt være Alexandra Christina, Prinsesse af Danmark, grevinde af Frederiksborg, og fortsat med prædikatet Højhed, eller i kort form: Hendes Højhed Prinsesse Alexandra, grevinde af Frederiksborg.​

If "of Frederiksborg" is Alexandra's legal surname, the present naming law would allow her sons to adopt the name even without the Queen's permission.


The press release announcing the creation of Queen Margrethe II and Prince Consort Henrik's descendants as Counts and Countesses of Monpezat, however, varied from the usual form and specified the complete designation of "Count of Monpezat" or "Countess of Monpezat" was a title. Thus, the then princes and princesses did not acquire a surname.

Titlen føres endvidere af efterkommere født i lovligt ægteskab, i overensstemmelse med de almindelige regler, der gælder herom, hvilket vil sige, at titlen ’greve af Monpezat’ videreføres af mandlige descendenter, medens kvindelige descendenter fører titlen ’komtesse af Monpezat’.​

I do wonder if that will change with the loss of their prince and princess titles.