The Future of the Danish Monarchy


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
THE Queen of Denmark could be on the verge of stepping down in favour of the first in line to the throne after giving her heartfelt backing to the next generation, royal expert Angela Mollard claimed.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...rk-Princess-Mary-Crown-Prince-Frederik-latest

Such a load of nonsense! Because of something she said during her last birthday celebration she is exspected to abdicate this year?
She has also said - repeatedly - that abdication is no option for her, as long as she is in good health. So, unless she is seriously ill - which we haven't heard of yet - I don't see her abdicating at all, and certainly not this year. Besides, in only 2 years - in January 2022 - she will be able to celebrate her 50th throne jubilee and with her fondness of being celebrated by the Danes I doubt that she is going to miss that opportunity - so, I definitely don't see an abdication before January 2022, if at all.
 
I thought that Prince Ingolf was demoted because he made a marriage that hadn't been approved.. and that Pss Elisabeth remained single, and lived with a partner because she did not wish to lose her royal title?

Yes. As I said, the fact that Prince Ingolf was not given special treatment (aside from retaining his apanage) on the basis that he was supposed to become king leads me to believe his sister Princess Elisabeth did not receive special treatment either.


She didn't seem to want to undertake a role as Princess and did a job in the Civil service but she still wantd to hold onto her style and title?

I am not sure she did not want to undertake a role as Princess, given that she accepted patronages and made her own decision to not marry her life partner for the purpose of remaining a member of the Royal House. It seems likelier that she was never offered a full-time role by the Queen, but I would be interested in what the royal watchers have to say.


What makes you think that might be the case? My take is that she most likely wanted to keep that option open (as would be wise as long as the heir doesn't have a heir). Had Frederik and Mary only had Christian, I would expect that they would have been glad to have Nikolai and Felix on board in at least a minor capacity (Henrik and Athena would be surplus/had not yet been born).

From what Muhler wrote earlier in this thread, it seems it was an open question in Denmark whether Prince Joachim's children would ever have an official role.
 
I don't know much abuot Elisabeth, perhaps she did expect some kind of offer to take on a "royal role", and as such she was willing to give up the idea of marrying her partner - but she also took on a career in the diplomatic service which was I assume unusual for the time. and when Margrethe's own children married commoners, with her approval, it seems odd that Elisabeth clearly felt that if she married her companion she would have to give up her title as her brothers had done..
 
Princess Elisabeth has stated in an interview to Billed-bladet that the reason behind her not marrying was that she felt that giving up her title and become Mrs Hermansen was a bit silly when she and her partner of 20 years Claus Hermansen had no intention of ever having children.
 
seems odd to me.. she didn't have much chance of being queen.. and she had a career and I assume financial security. Her brothers were willing to give up their princely titles to marry the women they were in love with...
 
seems odd to me.. she didn't have much chance of being queen.. and she had a career and I assume financial security. Her brothers were willing to give up their princely titles to marry the women they were in love with...
Not everyone wants to get married. Princess Elisabeth had a long, happy and stable relationship with Claus Hermansen and obviously didn't need a piece of paper to validate that relationship.
 
Such a load of nonsense! Because of something she said during her last birthday celebration she is exspected to abdicate this year?
She has also said - repeatedly - that abdication is no option for her, as long as she is in good health. So, unless she is seriously ill - which we haven't heard of yet - I don't see her abdicating at all, and certainly not this year. Besides, in only 2 years - in January 2022 - she will be able to celebrate her 50th throne jubilee and with her fondness of being celebrated by the Danes I doubt that she is going to miss that opportunity - so, I definitely don't see an abdication before January 2022, if at all.




I fully agree. And if the expert wopuld be real expert about the danish RF he should know that Queen Margrethe has very often (probably even more often then her college in the UK) stated that she would never abdicate and know that it is unliekly to happen.
 
I'm listening to the podcast in question right now and it's one factual mistake and one plonker after another. "Kate won't be queen she'll be called queen consort"... [emoji849]
 
and when Margrethe's own children married commoners, with her approval, it seems odd that Elisabeth clearly felt that if she married her companion she would have to give up her title as her brothers had done..

It does seem odd that the Queen continued to refuse approval to Princess Elisabeth after granting approval for Prince Joachim to marry a commoner without giving up his princely status. (Claus Hermansen was still living when Prince Joachim married for the first time.)

It is not clear to me whether the Queen had different standards for princes and princesses (on that basis we could expect Isabella, Josephine, and Athena to become commoners one day, while their brothers remain princes), for the main line and collateral lines (on that basis we could expect the Crown Prince's children to remain princes and princesses while Prince Joachim's sons are demoted to counts and his daughter to commoner), or for the older and younger generations (on that basis we could expect all of the Queen's grandchildren to keep their princely status).
 
It does seem odd that the Queen continued to refuse approval to Princess Elisabeth after granting approval for Prince Joachim to marry a commoner without giving up his princely status. (Claus Hermansen was still living when Prince Joachim married for the first time.)

I




But we don't know of Prienss Elisabeth ever has asked her cousin if she would give her cosnent to a possible marriage to Claus Hermansen. Could also be that Princess Elisabeth assumed that she would loose her Titel if she married him.
 
A second question for the experts on the Danish royal family: At the time of Prince Nikolai's birth, was it the expectation that he and his future siblings would have an official role with the monarchy? If that was the case, when and why did the change of plans take place?

I also remain curious about the flag days. :flowers:

No flag for Nikolai, he is not an active member of the DRF. Nor is he a child of the Monarch.
I don't think that rule is chiseled in stone though, it's simply up to the Monarch.

I don't recall much talk, specifically about Nikolai and later Felix, when they were small in regards to their future roles.
It was very much expected that Frederik would eventually marry and given his track-record of having female sweethearts, there were few problems in the horizon regarding off springs. (*) - Even though QMII was actually asked directly whether a future wife of Frederik should be blue-blooded. QMII retorted by replying that she wouldn't demand a blood-sample. :lol:
Anyway, for years during the 90's and very early 00's Joachim and Alexandra were the de facto cp-couple, both in regards to roles they had but also very much in the eyes of a wide segment of the public, so while it wasn't perhaps discussed at the coffee tables, the idea of a future king Nikolai wasn't that far off at the time.

As for Ingolf and his branch of the family.
He's brighter than he looks (a DK idiom). He has been the bridge-builder between the two branches of the family, because it is no secret (Ingolf has repeated that in an interview in BB this week BTW) that the transfer of the linage to Frederik IX's children caused quite a lot of bitterness and disappointment in Prince Knud's side of the family. And even though it has been denied, there is little doubt that it strained the relationship between the two brothers. (There has been rumors that Knud to at least some extent blamed Queen Ingrid. She had ambitions on behalf of her children etc. and while Frederik IX no doubt loved his brother, he was also very much a devoted husband and father.)
Now, this is just a thought of mine, QMII was and is fiercely devoted to her father. And being a teen at the time of the transfer in 1953, she would have been able to witness and understand first hand the bitterness and the strain on the family relations at the time and I cannot free myself from the thought that QMII once she became queen, sided totally with her parents.
And perhaps reinforced by the strain of taking over when she was so young, and felt so unprepared, combined with the grief of losing her father, I don't think the Knud side of the family got much sympathy or understanding from QMII. - Queens are only humans and sometimes they act like humans...

Because it is very clear that the two sides of the family did not wear out each others doormats!
It was Ingolf who was the go-between and who managed to reestablish a good relationship with in particular Joachim, but also the rest of QMII's branch.
From interviews we have learned that, while Knud may have been able to understand his brother's position - at least to some extent - there was considerable resentment within his family. Again, children tend to side with their parents.

In this weeks BB interview, mentioned here: https://www.bt.dk/royale/han-kunne-...e-man-skal-ikke-dvaele-ved-ting-der-alligevel

Ingolf comments on the transfer of linage like this:
Dét er, som det er, og ikke noget, jeg borer i eller bruger tid på. Tidligere var det til tider svært i og for familien, og som Dronningen (Margrethe, red.) så rigtigt sagde i udsendelsen om kong Frederik IX, så var det især en svær tid for 'onkel', altså min far. Men jeg bruger ikke tid på den slags. Man skal ikke dvæle ved ting, der alligevel ikke kan laves om eller gøres noget ved

"It is as it is, and it is not something I go into or spend time on. Previously it was at times difficult within and for the family and as the Queen so rightly said in the documentary about King Frederik IX, it was in particular a difficult time for -uncle,- that is, my father. But I don't spend time on that sort of things. You shouldn't dwell on things that cannot be undone or changed."

(*) There was some public concern in the 60's that princess Margrethe hadn't found someone or even dated anyone.
 
Last edited:
Such a load of nonsense! Because of something she said during her last birthday celebration she is exspected to abdicate this year?
She has also said - repeatedly - that abdication is no option for her, as long as she is in good health. So, unless she is seriously ill - which we haven't heard of yet - I don't see her abdicating at all, and certainly not this year. Besides, in only 2 years - in January 2022 - she will be able to celebrate her 50th throne jubilee and with her fondness of being celebrated by the Danes I doubt that she is going to miss that opportunity - so, I definitely don't see an abdication before January 2022, if at all.

It is British "press" dear. Lie after lie glued together. The paper is not even worth to be used in a cat litter box.
 
It does seem odd that the Queen continued to refuse approval to Princess Elisabeth after granting approval for Prince Joachim to marry a commoner without giving up his princely status. (Claus Hermansen was still living when Prince Joachim married for the first time.)

It is not clear to me whether the Queen had different standards for princes and princesses (on that basis we could expect Isabella, Josephine, and Athena to become commoners one day, while their brothers remain princes), for the main line and collateral lines (on that basis we could expect the Crown Prince's children to remain princes and princesses while Prince Joachim's sons are demoted to counts and his daughter to commoner), or for the older and younger generations (on that basis we could expect all of the Queen's grandchildren to keep their princely status).

But we don't know of Prienss Elisabeth ever has asked her cousin if she would give her cosnent to a possible marriage to Claus Hermansen. Could also be that Princess Elisabeth assumed that she would loose her Titel if she married him.

I think Princess Elisabeth sounded out what would happen should she marry. And that she would lose her title, should she do so.
There is a brutal logic to that BTW, I.e. continuously reducing the number of full royals. And the fact that her brothers lost their titles as well.
And the decision is down to the Monarch (except in the case of the Heir) as to whether a member of the family looses the title or not. So apart from Joachim being the son of the Monarch and (at the time) a potential spare, QMII had and has the right to treat him differently from Elisabeth.
And there is also the thought that apart from Elisabeth not being particularly conventional in regards to the status of her relationship with her partner, that she also wanted to be a living reminder that her branch of the family was so to speak saying: "We are still here! And we still have royal blood!"
 
It is British "press" dear. Lie after lie glued together. The paper is not even worth to be used in a cat litter box.
The article is based on an Australian podcast so it's not just the British this time.
 
The article is based on an Australian podcast so it's not just the British this time.

So this is probably based on a certain Australian's hopes rather than actual facts :lol:
 
So this is probably based on a certain Australian's hopes rather than actual facts [emoji38]
After listening to the podcast it's clear that they haven't got a clue about what they're talking about
 
No flag for Nikolai, he is not an active member of the DRF. Nor is he a child of the Monarch.
I don't think that rule is chiseled in stone though, it's simply up to the Monarch.

I don't recall much talk, specifically about Nikolai and later Felix, when they were small in regards to their future roles.
It was very much expected that Frederik would eventually marry and given his track-record of having female sweethearts, there were few problems in the horizon regarding off springs. - Even though QMII was actually asked directly whether a future wife of Frederik should be blue-blooded. QMII retorted by replying that she wouldn't demand a blood-sample. :lol:
Anyway, for years during the 90's and very early 00's Joachim and Alexandra were the de facto cp-couple, but in regards to roles they had but also very much in the eyes of a wide segment of the public, so while it wasn't perhaps discussed at the coffee tables, the idea of a future king Nikolai wasn't that far off at the time.

As for Ingolf and his branch of the family.
He's brighter than he looks (a DK idiom). He has been the bridge-builder between the two branches of the family, because it is no secret (Ingolf has repeated that in an interview in BB this week BTW) that the transfer of the linage to Frederik IX's children caused quite a lot of bitterness and disappointment in Prince Knud's side of the family. And even though it has been denied, there is little doubt that it strained the relationship between the two brothers. (There has been rumors that Knud to at least some extent blamed Queen Ingrid. She had ambitions on behalf of her children etc. and while Frederik IX no doubt loved his brother, he was also very much a devoted husband and father.)
Now, this is just a thought of mine, QMII was and is fiercely devoted to her father. And being a teen at the time of the transfer in 1953, she would have been able to witness and understand first hand the bitterness and the strain on the family relations at the time and I cannot free myself from the thought that QMII once she became queen, sided totally with her parents.
And perhaps reinforced by the strain of taking over when she was so young, and felt so unprepared, combined with the grief of losing her father, I don't think the Knud side of the family got much sympathy or understanding from QMII. - Queens are only humans and sometimes they act like humans...

Because it is very clear that the two sides of the family did not wear out each others doormats!
It was Ingolf who was the go-between and who managed to reestablish a good relationship with in particular Joachim, but also the rest of QMII's branch.
From interviews we have learned that, while Knud may have been able to understand his brother's position - at least to some extent - there was considerable resentment within his family. Again, children tend to side with their parents.

In this weeks BB interview, mentioned here: https://www.bt.dk/royale/han-kunne-...e-man-skal-ikke-dvaele-ved-ting-der-alligevel

Ingolf comments on the transfer of linage like this:
Dét er, som det er, og ikke noget, jeg borer i eller bruger tid på. Tidligere var det til tider svært i og for familien, og som Dronningen (Margrethe, red.) så rigtigt sagde i udsendelsen om kong Frederik IX, så var det især en svær tid for 'onkel', altså min far. Men jeg bruger ikke tid på den slags. Man skal ikke dvæle ved ting, der alligevel ikke kan laves om eller gøres noget ved

"It is as it is, and it is not something I go into or spend time on. Previously it was at times difficult within and for the family and as the Queen so rightly said in the documentary about King Frederik IX, it was in particular a difficult time for -uncle,- that is, my father. But I don't spend time on that sort of things. You shouldn't dwell on things that cannot be undone or changed."

Thank you for the informative answers!

Count Ingolf is certainly worthy of admiration both for calmly carrying on in the face of the public attacks on his appearance and intelligence as a child, and for taking it upon himself as an adult to mend a rift for which he and his generation bore no responsibility.


I think Princess Elisabeth sounded out what would happen should she marry. And that she would lose her title, should she do so.
There is a brutal logic to that BTW, I.e. continuously reducing the number of full royals. And the fact that her brothers lost their titles as well.
And the decision is down to the Monarch (except in the case of the Heir) as to whether a member of the family looses the title or not. So apart from Joachim being the son of the Monarch and (at the time) a potential spare, QMII had and has the right to treat him differently from Elisabeth.
And there is also the thought that apart from Elisabeth not being particularly conventional in regards to the status of her relationship with her partner, that she also wanted to be a living reminder that her branch of the family was so to speak saying: "We are still here! And we still have royal blood!"


Under the current Act of Succession, the Heir would also face automatic removal from the order of succession if he married without the Queen's approval in the Council of State. Because of this the Queen did give approval for the marriage of the Crown Prince in a Council of State in 2003.

§ 5
[...]
(3) If a person who is entitled to succeed to the throne decides to marry without the King’s or reigning Queen’s consent which shall be given during a meeting of the Council of State, he/she forfeits his/her right to succeed to the throne and so do his/her children born in lawful wedlock and their issue.​

Indeed, the Queen and Government have the legal right to treat different members of the family differently - but I hope the different treatment is on the basis of a consistent standard.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for the informative answers!

Count Ingolf is certainly worthy of admiration both for calmly carrying on in the face of the public attacks on his appearance and intelligence as a child, and for taking it upon himself as an adult to mend a rift for which he and his generation bore no responsibility.





Under the current Act of Succession, the Heir would also face automatic removal from the order of succession if he married without the Queen's approval in the Council of State.

§ 5
[...]
(3) If a person who is entitled to succeed to the throne decides to marry without the King’s or reigning Queen’s consent which shall be given during a meeting of the Council of State, he/she forfeits his/her right to succeed to the throne and so do his/her children born in lawful wedlock and their issue.​

Indeed, the Queen and Government have the legal right to treat different members of the family differently - but I hope the different treatment is on the basis of a consistent standard.

I couldn't agree more with you in regards to Ingolf.

The paragraph is there to prevent a royal from marrying someone "inappropriate", in particular the Heir!
But in regards to those further down the line, it's really up to the Monarch to remove and bestow titles. And while the Parliament would no doubt like to be informed and consulted, it's not something they would interfere with unless it was strictly necessary I'm convinced.
In theory, QMII could strip Joachim of his title tomorrow if she really wanted to. It would cause quite a stir! But in theory she could do it. She is the Monarch and she is the head of the family.
It's a useful power to have. Let's for a moment imagine Joachim got repeatedly drunk while in France and now he has been observed, for the third time, marching around the Eiffel Tower, wearing only a bow-tie singing: "I got two legs from my hips to the ground and when I move them, they walk around..."
Then QMII can and would probably be encouraged to strip him of his royal titles. ;)
 
Last edited:
Personally I find Count Ingolf a totally admirable human being . Certainly other " spare heirs ",could have taken his [ and his spouses ]behaviour as an example .
 
It is often speculated whether QMII will abdicate and one argument for doing that is that Frederik shouldn't be another Prince Charles, but take over in his prime. (An argument that appeals to me BTW.)

So here is a copy-pasted list of the age when a number of Danish monarchs took over. In reverse chronological order:

Margrethe 2.: 31 år
Frederik d. 9: 48 år
Christian d. 10.:42 år
Frederik d. 8.: 63 år
Christian d. 9: 45 år
Frederik d. 7.: 40 år
Christian d. 8.: 53 år
Frederik d. 6.: 40 år
Christian d. 7: 16 år
Frederik d. 5.: 23 år
Christian d. 6.: 31 år
Frederik d. 4.: 28 år
Christian d. 5.: 24 år
Frederik d. 3.:39 år
Christian d. 4.:11 år
Frederik d. 2.: 25 år
Christian d. 3.: 31 år
Frederik d. 1.: 52 år
Christian d. 2. 32 år
Hans: 27 år
Christian d. 1.: 22 år
 
It is often speculated whether QMII will abdicate and one argument for doing that is that Frederik shouldn't be another Prince Charles, but take over in his prime. (An argument that appeals to me BTW.)

So here is a copy-pasted list of the age when a number of Danish monarchs took over. In reverse chronological order:

Margrethe 2.: 31 år
Frederik d. 9: 48 år
Christian d. 10.:42 år
Frederik d. 8.: 63 år
Christian d. 9: 45 år
Frederik d. 7.: 40 år
Christian d. 8.: 53 år
Frederik d. 6.: 40 år
Christian d. 7: 16 år
Frederik d. 5.: 23 år
Christian d. 6.: 31 år
Frederik d. 4.: 28 år
Christian d. 5.: 24 år
Frederik d. 3.:39 år
Christian d. 4.:11 år
Frederik d. 2.: 25 år
Christian d. 3.: 31 år
Frederik d. 1.: 52 år
Christian d. 2. 32 år
Hans: 27 år
Christian d. 1.: 22 år

The ages remarkably correspond with the extending longevity of human life.
I would like to see Margrethe in a role alike Beatrix, enjoying ballets, concourses hippique, sculptures, grandchildren, attend State Banquets and royal events and see how well the son - in his prime- does the kingship.
 
It is often speculated whether QMII will abdicate and one argument for doing that is that Frederik shouldn't be another Prince Charles, but take over in his prime. (An argument that appeals to me BTW.)

So here is a copy-pasted list of the age when a number of Danish monarchs took over. In reverse chronological order:

Margrethe 2.: 31 år
Frederik d. 9: 48 år
Christian d. 10.:42 år
Frederik d. 8.: 63 år
Christian d. 9: 45 år
Frederik d. 7.: 40 år
Christian d. 8.: 53 år
Frederik d. 6.: 40 år
Christian d. 7: 16 år
Frederik d. 5.: 23 år
Christian d. 6.: 31 år
Frederik d. 4.: 28 år
Christian d. 5.: 24 år
Frederik d. 3.:39 år
Christian d. 4.:11 år
Frederik d. 2.: 25 år
Christian d. 3.: 31 år
Frederik d. 1.: 52 år
Christian d. 2. 32 år
Hans: 27 år
Christian d. 1.: 22 år


It should notice that nowadays people live longer. And about the queen's father: He was already over 40 when Margarethe was born when again Margarethe herself wasn't yet 30 when crown prince Frederick was born. And Frederick IX died at age of 72. There hardly is worry about second prince Charles case. Yes, Frederick has waited crown almost whole of his life but so have done and will do many other heirs when people are living older and older. Personally I don't see any reason why the queen should abdicate. It is her own decision.
 
I also disagree that they're planning to slim down the monarchy. That makes sense in the case of the BRF that has an overwhelming amount of members, many of which . But the DRF currently has 14 members. 6 of those are children. 4 have, since the day Christian was born, not been expected to have an official role within the monarchy. The DRF is already a slimmed-down monarchy and there's no need for further slimming down as that will happen naturally.

The monarchy already has begun to slim down. Princess Elisabeth was a part-time working member of the royal family with a list of royal patronages assigned to her. She attended New Year's receptions and official dinners in her capacity as a member of the Royal House, had the Order of the Elephant, and whilst she had a career of her own, it was a traditional and non-commercial royal career in the foreign service.

Prince Nikolai is in the same position as Princess Elisabeth as the oldest child of the second child of a monarch, but he was not granted the Order of the Elephant upon coming of age, as is traditional for members of the Royal House, nor been present at New Year's receptions or official dinners. He has been permitted to work commercially, and every indication is that he will not be an official working member of the monarchy, even part-time.
 
Last edited:
The monarchy already has begun to slim down. Princess Elisabeth was a part-time working member of the royal family with a list of royal patronages assigned to her. She attended New Year's receptions and official dinners in her capacity as a member of the Royal House, had the Order of the Elephant, and whilst she had a career of her own, it was a traditional and non-commercial royal career in the foreign service.

Prince Nikolai is in the same position as Princess Elisabeth as the oldest child of the second child of a monarch, but he was not granted the Order of the Elephant upon coming of age, as is traditional for members of the Royal House, nor been present at New Year's receptions or official dinners. He has been permitted to work commercially, and every indication is that he will not be an official working member of the monarchy, even part-time.

But the most important members are the Queen, Prince Frederik, Princess Mary, Prince Christian, Isabella, Vincent and Josephine and also Prince Joachim (although he is now in France) and Princess Benedikte.
I believe that Princess Isabella will have an official role in the monarchy in the future and help her father, mother and brother in the activities of the Royal Family.
 
I think there will be hardly any acceptance for a big royal court with many working royals in the future in any country. It's a pretty overcome model and future generations if plural will struggle to see the advantages.
We are lucky in Danmark still, but times are changing here, too.
Maybe the DRF manages to establish a working idea of their court,
they seem to be sensible about it and taking steps to ensure the best for Christian.
I would not like to be in their shoes, loving your child but knowing his future is somehow predicted but in the same moment unsafe. How raise a child for taking over a role like this, not knowing if the job still exist once it's grown.
Maybe more difficult than for generations before our days, but also less drama, illnesses, wars .... I feel F&M have done a good job already as Christian seems to be selfconfident, which will help him whatever his future might be in the end.
 
Which is also why so many royals, especially the heirs, get such a broad and comprehensive education.

No monarchy is likely to be abolished overnight, barring revolution or some extremely serious transgression by the royals themselves - say murder or a similar serious crime.
There will be a period leading up to the abolishing of a monarchy. Then a decision period. Followed by a transition period.
In the case of Denmark it will take two general elections followed by a vote to change the Constitution. That alone could easily take 6-8 years. Because there will also have to be a debate about what form of system should replace the monarchy and what to do with the royals themselves.

There will as such be time to prepare and reeducate the royals for new roles. Diplomatic service of some sort seems to be a good guess.
And it's likely the adult royals over say 30-35 will receive a generous pension.
That IMO would be the most amiable solution. (Doing a Count Ingolf.)
Because keep in mind that many citizen in any monarchy will still be strongly opposed to the system replacing the monarchy and just kicking the royals out on the street to fend for themselves would be provocative, even volatile.
 
No monarchy is likely to be abolished overnight

What I will write now, makes perhaps no sense, since it is built on no real knowledge...

But I was under the impression, that when Harold Bluetooth, Sven Fork-Beard and Magnus the Great founded the Danish Monarchy a thousand years ago, this family was that old and for so long the leading family of the lands, that it was said: They are direct descendents of Odin, the God, himself!

And the cultivated Queen, Denmark has now, is a descendant of these guys!!!

No way, this country will abolish monarchy! Monarchy is a very old and very deep thing there!
 
Because keep in mind that many citizen in any monarchy will still be strongly opposed to the system replacing the monarchy and just kicking the royals out on the street to fend for themselves would be provocative, even volatile.


I agree that probably would not happen in Denmark, but royals in several European countries (Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece) were literally kicked out on the street to fend for themselves and were not only expropriated, but also literally banned sometimes from even re-entering their countries of origin.


I know that the circumstances were different in the aforementioned cases and, again, I am not saying that is likely to happen in Denmark. I am just saying that, historically, it is not as far-fetched or inconceivable as you might have suggested in your post and it doesn't necessarily take a violent revolution or civil war as in France or Russia.
 
But the monarchy seems to be very safe in Denmark. I believe that it is very unlikely to be abolished.
 
Back
Top Bottom