Possible Baby Names

[Elspeth]

Well, yes, but that sort of depends on how you interpret "secondarily." I thought the reason Queen Margrethe succeeded was because the next male heir (or his son) had some sort of disability or other problem, not because the king didn't have a possible male heir (at least this is what my Danish aunt told me).

[Josefine]

Originally posted by Elspeth@May 24th, 2004 - 10:41 am
Well, yes, but that sort of depends on how you interpret "secondarily." I thought the reason Queen Margrethe succeeded was because the next male heir (or his son) had some sort of disability or other problem, not because the king didn't have a possible male heir (at least this is what my Danish aunt told me).

are you talking about Queen Margrethe II?
becouse she only have sisters no brothers. and there have never been a brother what i know of that have died

[Theilmann]

No, there was no brother. If the law of succession hadn't been changed with the change to the constitution in 1953. Prince Ingolf (now Count Ingolf of Rosenborg) who was the oldest son of King Frederik IX's younger brother Prince Knud would have become King. (Well first Prince Knud would have become King, but you get the drift )

[Elspeth]

Originally posted by Theilmann@May 24th, 2004 - 3:21 am
No, there was no brother. If the law of succession hadn't been changed with the change to the constitution in 1953. Prince Ingolf (now Count Ingolf of Rosenborg) who was the oldest son of King Frederik IX's younger brother Prince Knud would have become King. (Well first Prince Knud would have become King, but you get the drift )

The thing I was asking was why the law was changed. According to my aunt, it wasn't simply changed because the king didn't have sons, it was changed because the king didn't have sons AND the heir at the time (or his son) was considered unsuitable for some reason (my aunt said something about a disability). Which suggests that if Prince Knud and his son had been considered suitable heirs, the law wouldn't have been changed and the succession would have gone to him.

If there's that strong a preference for a male heir, I was wondering if the changed law only applies if the next male heir doesn't measure up somehow (as seemed to be the case in 1953) or if it applies generally.

[Chatleen]

I have this feeling, that some politicians actually hope, that the first born of Fredrik and Mary will be a girl. It is very difficult to change the constitution, yes, because a very high share of the voters needs to be in favour of the change. But equal order of succession for men and women might just be the key for this.

There are lots of reasons, why the constitution should be changed. As politician Niels Helveg Petersen has told in interviews, the constitution doesn't state, that Denmark is a democracy and a monarchy; it only says, that Denmark is a monarchy

The constitution is out of line with practice. For instance, the Queen according to the constitution has to accept every new law, but in practice she does not and should not have any influence.

I remember some funny story. I think it was the king of Nepal, who really liked the danish constitution The thing is, that the constitution nearly states the King (or Queen) as an absolute monarch, which luckily isn't in line with reality.

[zozi]

I think Baby Princess girl

Princess Margrethe Ingrid Carlotte and Crown Princess Mary s mother s name

What is the Crown Princess Mary mother s name?
she is died

may be baby boy

Prince Christian

[Jasl]

Originally posted by zozi@May 25th, 2004 - 3:59 am

Princess Margrethe Ingrid Carlotte and Crown Princess Mary s mother s name

You know, I like that name very much! (I really love Olivia but now realise that there's very little chance that their baby girl will have the first name Olivia!)

I also like Princess Margrethe Frederika Henrietta Ingrid or perhaps even Princess Margrethe Henrietta Ingrid Mary. Hmmm, I think I like the former.


My (current) final choice: Princess Margrethe Frederika Henrietta Ingrid :flower: :flower: :flower:

[wymanda]

Dagmar Alexandra Thyra Henrietta Margarethe Ingrid

Dagmar - Empress of Russia {born a Princess of Denmark}
Alexandra - Sister to Dagmar who became Queen of England
Thyra - Third Sister who married into the house of Hanover
Henrietta - After Mary's mum
Margarethe - After Fred's mum
Ingrid - After Fred's grandma

[Jasl]

Nooooo, not "Dagmar"!! :o I'd rather have "Thorhildur" (one of Margrethe's names) than Dagmar.

I think Mary would choose a historic first name, but I also don't think she will feel shackled in having to choose a historic name. I think they'll choose one they'll like.

And I still like Margrethe Henrietta Ingrid.... lovely! And all names very meaningful to the Crown Princely couple.

[moosey60]

Josefine Madeleine Victoria Margrethe
Saga Elisabeth Sophie Margrethe
Emma Alexandra Ingrid Margrethe
Margrethe Amalie Mathilde Elisabeth
Hélène Ingrid Lucie Henrietta Margrethe
Caroline Thérèse Margrethe Elisabeth
Margrethe Ingrid Amandine Elisabeth
Amalie Thérèse Margrethe Mathilde
Ingrid Elisabeth Sophie Aurore Margrethe
Sophie Henriette Aurora Margrethe

Henrik Valdemar Alexander Frederik
Christian Joachim Valdemar Frederik
Frederik Nikolai Valdemar Christian
Johannes Peter Andreas Frederik

I dunno..I think the male names are harder to come up with. You have to use 'Frederik' and you have to use 'Christian'...but I don't really know any Danish male names. Heh...used some rather Swedish girl and guy names....used some French ones too. Seeing as Joachim and Alexandra's kids are named Nikolai and Felix, I figured the Danish royals weren't too strict over using posh, fancy names.

[wymanda]

Originally posted by moosey60@Jun 1st, 2004 - 8:54 am
Saga Elisabeth Sophie Margrethe

Saga

Where I was born, in the UK, a Sagger (pronounced Saga) is something you put unfired pottery into a kiln with!! :P :P

[Yennie]

was changed because the king didn't have sons AND the heir at the time (or his son) was considered unsuitable for some reason

Perhaps you´re thinking about Great Britain? Queen Elizabeth II father became king when his older brother abdicated because of his love for a woman not suitable to be Queen.
Otherwise QE II (and Charles, William...) would just be a "ordinary" member of the royal family.

[wymanda]

Originally posted by Yennie@Jun 2nd, 2004 - 1:27 am
Otherwise QE II (and Charles, William...) would just be a "ordinary" member of the royal family.

Yennie,
You are only partially correct. The present Queen would still have succeeded to the throne but probably on the death of her uncle in 1972. Whilst the Queen Mum always maintained that the stress of being King killed her husband prematurly in 1952 it is fact that King George VI was a chain smoker and was predisposed to the lung cancer that killed him.

The royal family was well aware in 1936 that Wallis Simpson was unable to have children due to damage caused by the abuse she suffered at the hands of her first husband. Therefore the succession would still have passed to Elizabeth & her children.

[moosey60]

Originally posted by wymanda+Jun 1st, 2004 - 1:40 am--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (wymanda @ Jun 1st, 2004 - 1:40 am)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-moosey60@Jun 1st, 2004 - 8:54 am
Saga Elisabeth Sophie Margrethe

Saga

Where I was born, in the UK, a Sagger (pronounced Saga) is something you put unfired pottery into a kiln with!! :P :P [/b][/quote]
Saga means 'story' or just...you know saga as in ancient story...legend...esque? Well I knew a little Swedish girl named Saga. I think it's a nice name...lol, British colloquialism is great!

[agisele]

i think that the Crown Couple will have two children. the first a princess followed by the next an heir.

first born: Princess Margarethe Henrietta Dagmar Ingrid
second born: Prince Christian Harald Frederik Henri

a lot of meaning and history put into those names as you guys would know already by looking at them.

[Fashionista100]

So let me see if I get this right:
There is no law about naming royal heirs.
There is nothing in the constitution about naming royal heirs.
There is no tradition about naming royal heirs.
There is a royal decree about naming royal heirs.
A royal decree is not a law, or tradition, but a strongly adheared to guideline that royals have been "expected" to follow.
Do I have that right?

If that is right I think Mary and Fred may bend the guideline a bit. Maxima named her daughter Cathrina-Amalia. They said they were to refer to her as Amalia. Denmark could do something similar as a way to honor both the past and the present. Or perhaps Mary and Fred could be the first to do something different because they want to modernize the monarchy. Nothing is going to happen if they don't follow royal decree. I will be interesting to see.

[Chatleen]

There is no law about naming royal heirs.

Right

There is nothing in the constitution about naming royal heirs.

Right

There is a royal decree about naming royal heirs.

Right

There is no tradition about naming royal heirs.

There is definitely a tradition regarding naming of male royal heirs. If Mary and Frederik's first born is a boy, I'm quite certain, that his first name will be Christian. The concept of females born as heir to the throne is new in Denmark. (Margrethe wasn't born as the heir). This means, that Mary and Frederik get the chance of making a hole new tradition :)

[missally]

If it's a girl, it might be something like Elisabeth Margarethe Ingrid Henrietta Desiree or if it's a boy, Christian Frederick Henrik Albert. Just a couple of suggestions although they are quiet conservative. Perhaps they will go with an equally regal but more unconventional name

[CD.]

Let Mary get pregnant first.

[Chatleen]

Originally posted by CD.@Jul 5th, 2004 - 2:04 am
Let Mary get pregnant first.

For all we know, maybe she is :P