Nikolai and Felix: Future Possibilities and Options

[Muhler]

That's interesting. I would have thought that HM Queen Margrethe II would have preferred Danish girls but is open to anyone that her sons would fall in love with and marry. Why is that do you think?
------------------------------------------------
"You don't get out of life alive." ~Jimmy the Hand~
"The battle of the sexes will never be won, we fraternize with the enemy"

There is nothing to hinder DRF members to marry Danes. After all even the odd Danish king has married Danes. But it's been the custom for many years that DRF members find their spouses abroad.
Beforehand mainly for dynastic and alliance reasons. Later because there really aren't that many high ranking nobles in DK suitable for a fairly equal marriage to a DRF member.
Today that has of course changed. The last three additions to the DRF were all commoners.
But it still makes good sense to marry someone from abroad. There is no family in DK, who can make a spectacle of themselves. No one in DK who "know" in the Biblical definition of the word, any potential new DRF member. And it's expands the horizon to marry a foreigner.

Since M&F's children are IMO almost certain to spend at least some time on their own in Australia (and Scotland too perhaps) there is a decent chance Australia won't have made its last contribution to the DRF.
There is IMO a pretty good chance M&F's children will end up marrying foreigners - and they may even be if not encouraged, then certainly not discouraged from marrying foreigners.

It's a bit different for Joachim's children. Since they are more or less destined to have their own careers, they are not as bound by the "family-tradition".
But it's after all a very cosmopolitan family...

 

[imojeen]

Did Nikolai graduate from high school? In many countries students graduate from high school at the age of 18. Does he attends university?

 

[Muhler]

Did Nikolai graduate from high school? In many countries students graduate from high school at the age of 18. Does he attends university?

Nikolai will graduate from high school this summer.

I imagine he will then opt for volunteer conscription. His dad, Joachim, has certainly expressed a preference for him doing that.
It is IMO likely that he will combine the volunteer conscription with a sabbatical year, where he will either have a job, or more likely go traveling.
Then he will attend a university. What university and what subject remains to be seen.
So far we basically only know that Nikolai is an intelligent, well articulated and seemingly confident young man. - Should anyone wish to guess where he might go.

 

[Blog Real]

Will Nikolai, Felix, Henrik and Athena have to give up their place in the line of succession to the throne after they get married?

Princess Elisabeth has always maintained her place in the line of succession, perhaps because she never married.
But Elisabeth's brothers abdicated.

I'm curious to know what will happen to Prince Joachim's children.

 

[Muhler]

Will Nikolai, Felix, Henrik and Athena have to give up their place in the line of succession to the throne after they get married?

Princess Elisabeth has always maintained her place in the line of succession, perhaps because she never married.
But Elisabeth's brothers abdicated.

I'm curious to know what will happen to Prince Joachim's children.

That's up to the Monarch - and themselves of course.

I will guess that all Joachim's children will end up not being in the Line of Succession.

One good time would be when they marry or turn eighteen.
Nikolai and Felix show no inclination whatsoever to active members of the DRF and that means their affiliation of royal duties let alone the Danish population diminish, in the sense that people nor they themselves can see them returning from whatever life they have to sit on throne.
Then there is the number of DRF members to take into consideration. It's impractical and even a little silly to end up having perhaps 25 royals running around all over the place in a generation from now.
The number has to be reduced.

The best solution is if Joachim's children all give up their royal titles, and retain perhaps their titles of counts de Montpezat. Perhaps with the exception of Athena, being a girl she can't inherit that title. But the Monarch is free to give her a person title. Which could very well be countess of Montpezat. - In return for her giving up her royal title.

One way or another, the four of them are going to lose their royal status. I can't see any other direction at present.
And all or one of them insisting on keeping title and or status will be met with very little public sympathy.

So unless all four of them at some point decide to give up status and title, the Monarch (most likely Frederik) is going to have to cut through.

The DRF tradition, in various ways, is to only maintain a core royal family consisting of the most senior members. The rest are destined to fade out to nobility and eventually commoners.
Joachim's children belong in that category, just as Isabella's, Vincent and Josephine's children will.

Otherwise we would have around 9.000 royals in DK right now.

 

[Blog Real]

That's up to the Monarch - and themselves of course.

I will guess that all Joachim's children will end up not being in the Line of Succession.

One good time would be when they marry or turn eighteen.
Nikolai and Felix show no inclination whatsoever to active members of the DRF and that means their affiliation of royal duties let alone the Danish population diminish, in the sense that people nor they themselves can see them returning from whatever life they have to sit on throne.
Then there is the number of DRF members to take into consideration. It's impractical and even a little silly to end up having perhaps 25 royals running around all over the place in a generation from now.
The number has to be reduced.

The best solution is if Joachim's children all give up their royal titles, and retain perhaps their titles of counts de Montpezat. Perhaps with the exception of Athena, being a girl she can't inherit that title. But the Monarch is free to give her a person title. Which could very well be countess of Montpezat. - In return for her giving up her royal title.

One way or another, the four of them are going to lose their royal status. I can't see any other direction at present.
And all or one of them insisting on keeping title and or status will be met with very little public sympathy.

So unless all four of them at some point decide to give up status and title, the Monarch (most likely Frederik) is going to have to cut through.

The DRF tradition, in various ways, is to only maintain a core royal family consisting of the most senior members. The rest are destined to fade out to nobility and eventually commoners.
Joachim's children belong in that category, just as Isabella's, Vincent and Josephine's children will.

Otherwise we would have around 9.000 royals in DK right now.

Yes you are right. Thanks for your comment.

 

[Somebody]

The best solution is if Joachim's children all give up their royal titles, and retain perhaps their titles of counts de Montpezat. Perhaps with the exception of Athena, being a girl she can't inherit that title. But the Monarch is free to give her a person title. Which could very well be countess of Montpezat. - In return for her giving up her royal title.

According to the website of the Danish royal family Athena IS Komtesse de Monpezat, so I don't see a reason why she would have to give that title up if she would loose her place in the line of succession.

On her personal page: Athena Marguerite Françoise Marie, Prinsesse til Danmark, komtesse af Monpezat, er datter af D.K.H. Prins Joachim og Prinsesse Marie.

One way or another, the four of them are going to lose their royal status. I can't see any other direction at present.
And all or one of them insisting on keeping title and or status will be met with very little public sympathy.

So unless all four of them at some point decide to give up status and title, the Monarch (most likely Frederik) is going to have to cut through.

The DRF tradition, in various ways, is to only maintain a core royal family consisting of the most senior members. The rest are destined to fade out to nobility and eventually commoners.
Joachim's children belong in that category, just as Isabella's, Vincent and Josephine's children will.

Otherwise we would have around 9.000 royals in DK right now.

Why is it considered necessary for them to loose their royal status? In other Scandinavian countries the princesses lost their style of royal highness but remained 'princess', while in the Netherlands the loss of a place in the line of succession did lead to loosing the title 'prince of the Netherlands' (for prince Friso) but not to loosing the style of royal highness nor of the title 'prince(ss) of Orange-Nassau' - although their children would not gain that style nor title. But of course, in the past, in Denmark those losing their position in line to the throne would also have to give up their royal titles but became counts of Rosenborg instead. As Joachim's children are already counts of Monpezat, that wouldn't be necessary to keep them as 'nobles' (if that is the intention) if they would want to be consistent they could decide to always make someone who looses the title of prince(ss) of Denmark a count(ess) of Rosenborg.

 

[Prinsara]

Nikolai and Felix are over 18 and have been for awhile, though, so that doesn’t seem to be the criterion.

And what if they find other royals to marry? That used to be the decider, right?

 

[Muhler]

According to the website of the Danish royal family Athena IS Komtesse de Monpezat, so I don't see a reason why she would not to give that title up if she would loose her place in the line of succession.

On her personal page: Athena Marguerite Françoise Marie, Prinsesse til Danmark, komtesse af Monpezat, er datter af D.K.H. Prins Joachim og Prinsesse Marie.



Why is it considered necessary for them to loose their royal status? In other Scandinavian countries the princesses lost their style of royal highness but remained 'princess', while in the Netherlands the loss of a place in the line of succession did lead to loosing the title 'prince of the Netherlands' (for prince Friso) but not to loosing the style of royal highness nor of the title 'prince(ss) of Orange-Nassau' - although their children would not gain that style nor title. But of course, in the past, in Denmark those losing their position in line to the throne would also have to give up their royal titles but became counts of Rosenborg instead. As Joachim's children are already counts of Monpezat, that wouldn't be necessary to keep them as 'nobles' (if that is the intention) if they would want to be consistent they could decide to always make someone who looses the title of prince(ss) of Denmark a count(ess) of Rosenborg.

A komtesse is an unmarried daughter of a count. The second she marries she takes her husband's title. And if he doesn't have one, she has none either.

They will do a Rosenborg to keep it simple.
Being royals, their children will almost automatically become royals as well. It's still up to the monarch to decide but as a ground rule, the child of a prince is a prince/ss.

And as said before, we can't have inactive royals running around all over the place. It devalues the status and the whole thing about royalty is that they have a special status. That's part of the show.

As for Elisabeth, that was in spite, that she never "gave up" her status.
The DRF can afford the luxury of one Elisabeth, but not four.
Had she married or given up her status, I think QMII would have given her a title. I.e. doing an Alexandra.

Nikolai and Felix are over 18 and have been for awhile, though, so that doesn’t seem to be the criterion.

And what if they find other royals to marry? That used to be the decider, right?

Will it make that much of a difference?
Other royal families have the same problem: Keeping the numbers down. So unless say Nikolai marry a senior member of another royal family, what reason is there for him or his spouse to keep their royal status?
If he does marry a senior, say Sophia of Spain, then he is likely to move to Spain to live and fork for the SRF. And then his title and status is up to the Spanish monarch.

 

[JR76]

I don't think that we'll see any more counts af Rosenborg created. They all belonged to a different patrilineal house and as Mühler stated the boys and men in question are already counts de Monpezat. Their grandfather would turn in his grave if they received another, more senior, title and I personally believe that, while part of the ancient Danish Royal dynasty, they're all very proud of carrying their beloved grandfather's name.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Had she married or given up her status, I think QMII would have given her a title. I.e. doing an Alexandra.

Princess Elisabeth stated that if had she married her partner, she would have become Mrs. Hermansen.

And what if they find other royals to marry? That used to be the decider, right?

So unless say Nikolai marry a senior member of another royal family, what reason is there for him or his spouse to keep their royal status?

Tradition would be the primary reason, though it may or may not happen.

I don't think that we'll see any more counts af Rosenborg created. They all belonged to a different patrilineal house and as Mühler stated the boys and men in question are already counts de Monpezat. Their grandfather would turn in his grave if they received another, more senior, title and I personally believe that, while part of the ancient Danish Royal dynasty, they're all very proud of carrying their beloved grandfather's name.

I agree that the creation of counts of Monpezat makes any further creations of counts of Rosenborg superfluous for the male-line descendants of Prince Henrik (though it might remain an option for e.g. children of Princess Isabella), but I don't think Rosenborg castle, the inspiration for the Rosenborg countdom, is entailed to a particular patrilineal line.

 

[Stefan]

They will do a Rosenborg to keep it simple.
Being royals, their children will almost automatically become royals as well. It's still up to the monarch to decide but as a ground rule, the child of a prince is a prince/ss.

Would it not be possible that they keep their Princely Titles but their possible children only become /Count/Komtesse af Monpezat

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

We see more or less the same in the Netherlands: junior royals fading away into Nobility. In Denmark the juniors have the hereditary noble title greve/komtesse af Monpezat at their disposal. In the Netherlands the juniors have the hereditary noble title graaf/gravin van Oranje-Nassau van Amsberg at their disposal. So on itself in both countries it is "solved": royal princes and princesses are children born to a monarch or to a future monarch. That is the evolution.

 

[lula]

In Spain, the children of the infantes are "Grande de España", which is the highest title of the nobility, the rank below infante and above duke. With the title, they have the treatment of Most Excellent Sir/Madam.

 

[Muhler]

Would it not be possible that they keep their Princely Titles but their possible children only become /Count/Komtesse af Monpezat

It sure is and would be a good and fair solution.

There are however three things to consider:
A) Should adults who have private careers of their own and are otherwise inactive in regards to the DRF, retain their royal status? Also keeping in mind that status includes limitations, accountability and scrutiny.
That is: What are they? Royals who live the life of commoners? Or commoners who happens to be royals? Neither fowl nor fish.
B) They can all expect to live to celebrate their 100th b-day, probably longer. That's an awful long time to be a kind of semi-royals.
And so can the children of M&F.
Let's say they on average have 2 children each. That's eight royals more in 30 years, for a total of sixteen royals. Plus M&F and J&M who we must expect to be alive in 30 years. So by 2052 we have will have no less than twenty Danish royals running around all over the place.
C) In the name of fairness, the courtesy extended to Joachim's children, must now also be extended to Isabella, Vincent and Josephine's children. That is, They will become inactive royals as well. - And live long lives...
So by 60 years, in 2082, we can expect to have some 25 royals hanging around on the streets.

- You see? There will be an inflation of royals, of which the majority will serve no purpose - while the population in DK during the same period will drop dramatically. At least with one million, before it begins to rise or stabilize again. That will happen in 20-30 years when my generation starts to die off in large numbers.

So to sum up: Too many royals deflates the status of the DRF.
The obvious solution is to keep the number down, preferably voluntarily.

 

[JR76]

A komtesse is an unmarried daughter of a count. The second she marries she takes her husband's title. And if he doesn't have one, she has none either.


As for Elisabeth, that was in spite, that she never "gave up" her status.
The DRF can afford the luxury of one Elisabeth, but not four.
Had she married or given up her status, I think QMII would have given her a title. I.e. doing an Alexandra.

Princess Elisabeth stated that if had she married her partner, she would have become Mrs. Hermansen.

I've seen some conflicting references, but I believe that Princess Dagmar, the latest (and first?) Danish princess who married a commoner, lost her rank and title.

I agree that the creation of counts of Monpezat makes any further creations of counts of Rosenborg superfluous for the male-line descendants of Prince Henrik (though it might remain an option for e.g. children of Princess Isabella), but I don't think Rosenborg castle, the inspiration for the Rosenborg countdom, is entailed to a particular patrilineal line.

I did not mean that there is an entail on Rosenborg or the title. I meant that the Rosenborgs were of another time, another (patrilineal) royal house and that the Monpezats will most likely want to remain just that instead of receiving another (IMO unnecessary) title.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

In Spain, the children of the infantes are "Grande de España", which is the highest title of the nobility, the rank below infante and above duke. With the title, they have the treatment of Most Excellent Sir/Madam.

A Grande de España is a treatment, I thought? Not a title.
For an example eventual children of Froilán de Marichalar will not be a Grande but a plain Mr/Mrs/Ms. The descendants in male lineage of Nicolai and Felix will be greve or komtesse de Monpezat.

A komtesse is an unmarried daughter of a count. The second she marries she takes her husband's title. And if he doesn't have one, she has none either.

[...]

If Athena marries a Mr Harald Schmidt-Jensen, will she not become Fru Athena Schmidt-Jensen født komtesse de Monpezat ?

 

[Muhler]

If Athena marries a Mr Harald Schmidt-Jensen, will she not become Fru Athena Schmidt-Jensen født komtesse de Monpezat ?

I don't think there will be any reference to her pre-marriage title.
As I see it she will simply be Fru Athena Schmidt-Jensen. - Or alternatively Fru Glücksborg, married to Hr. Schmidt-Jensen.
Or Fru Monpezat, perhaps. Or Fru Cavalier?

 

[Mbruno]

That's up to the Monarch - and themselves of course.

I will guess that all Joachim's children will end up not being in the Line of Succession.

One good time would be when they marry or turn eighteen.
Nikolai and Felix show no inclination whatsoever to active members of the DRF and that means their affiliation of royal duties let alone the Danish population diminish, in the sense that people nor they themselves can see them returning from whatever life they have to sit on throne.
Then there is the number of DRF members to take into consideration. It's impractical and even a little silly to end up having perhaps 25 royals running around all over the place in a generation from now.
The number has to be reduced.

The best solution is if Joachim's children all give up their royal titles, and retain perhaps their titles of counts de Montpezat. Perhaps with the exception of Athena, being a girl she can't inherit that title. But the Monarch is free to give her a person title. Which could very well be countess of Montpezat. - In return for her giving up her royal title.

One way or another, the four of them are going to lose their royal status. I can't see any other direction at present.
And all or one of them insisting on keeping title and or status will be met with very little public sympathy.

So unless all four of them at some point decide to give up status and title, the Monarch (most likely Frederik) is going to have to cut through.

The DRF tradition, in various ways, is to only maintain a core royal family consisting of the most senior members. The rest are destined to fade out to nobility and eventually commoners.
Joachim's children belong in that category, just as Isabella's, Vincent and Josephine's children will.

Otherwise we would have around 9.000 royals in DK right now.

The tradition in Denmark has been that all male persons in the line of succession are Princes. So, I don't see Nikolai and Felix losing their titles unless they are removed from the succession. For that to happen, it suffices to get married without the monarch's consent. In that case, both princes and the descendants of their respective marriages would forefeit their succession rights and, per tradition, would be stripped of royal titles. There is no need to create a separate title of nobility for them because they are already Counts of Monpezat and the title is hereditary in male line.

A Grande de España is a treatment, I thought? Not a title.

For an example eventual children of Froilán de Marichalar will not be a Grande but a plain Mr/Mrs/Ms. The descendants in male lineage of Nicolai and Felix will be greve or komtesse de Monpezat.

Grande de España is a dignity that is normally attached to a title of the Kingdom or may be (only rarely) conferrred personally without being linked to a title. In either case, the dignity is normally hereditary and, when attached to the title, is transmitted to the title's successors in perpetuity. A titled person who is also a Grandee, like a Peer of France, outranks all other titled persons who are not Grandees even if his (or her) title itself is of lower rank. For example, a count who is a Grandee outranks a marquis who is not. The King can either create a new title with Grandeeship already attached thereto or he may attach Grandeeship to a preexisting title by a separate royal decree. Under the current Spanish constitution, both situations require the countersignature of the Spanish prime minister.

The situation of the children of Infantes or Infantas sine 1987 is different because they have the "consideration of a Grandee", but without any privilege other than the style of Excellency (that is also explictly mentioned in the text of the Royal Decree). Nowadays the distinction is mostly academic because Grandees have actually lost all their privileges and precedence in Spanish law other than the right to be addressed as Excellency. The only relevant distinction between a Grandee in his or her own right and a child of an Infante or Infanta is then in practice that the former can transmit the Grandeeship to his or her successor whereas. for the latter, the "consideration" of Grandee is personal and non-hereditary as you have correctly pointed out.

 

[Muhler]

True.

But I think a reformation of that is not only called for but desired by the public - or rather it will be. If for no other reasons than practicality.
Because if we include Vincent, we will have no less than four redundant princes.

And with Isabella being, I'm convinced, a prominent number two and substitute. (And who knows, popular as well. She's pretty well liked already now and there is a growing interest in her.) I think you will find that there will be quite a support for Isabella to have equal rights to her kid-brother and cousins.
After all it's a little interesting to advocate equal rights for women, even in a royal institution, and then say: Yeah, well, Isabella will lose out because she's a woman, but her three cousins will retain their royal line, because they are males.

In order for the monarchy to not only continue but also stay relevant and popular, they have to keep up with current trends to some extent and also change.
The concept of abdications was almost unheard of in most royal families only a generation ago, but now look at Belgium, Japan, Spain, even the Papal State.

So I can easily envision a simple rule saying: Only the children of the Monarch/Heir retain their royal titles. Children of younger siblings will upon turning 18 or getting married or when the Heir has his/her first child and that child turns 5 years old, lose their royal titles.
Everybody else will become nobles. That is become count/countess of whatever.
It doesn't even have to be made law. The monarch can set up that rule himself.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

I don't think there will be any reference to her pre-marriage title.
As I see it she will simply be Fru Athena Schmidt-Jensen. - Or alternatively Fru Glücksborg, married to Hr. Schmidt-Jensen.
Or Fru Monpezat, perhaps. Or Fru Cavalier?

What about examples as Fru Anna Emilie von Lowzow født komtesse Lerche-Lerchenborg, Grevinde Christine Holstein-Holsteinborg født komtesse Reventlow, Baronesse Friderica Løvenskjold født komtesse Knuth, Fru Marie Antoniette Krieger von Lowzow født komtesse Bille-Brahe-Selby ?

 

[Muhler]

What about examples as Fru Anna Emilie von Lowzow født komtesse Lerche-Lerchenborg, Grevinde Christine Holstein-Holsteinborg født komtesse Reventlow, Baronesse Friderica Løvenskjold født komtesse Knuth, Fru Marie Antoniette Krieger von Lowzow født komtesse Bille-Brahe-Selby ?

That's, I presume, how they are presented on the DRF guestlists?
In that case, I stand corrected.

However, in day to day life, a reference to their previous titles is, I dare say, not being used outside the court.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

That's, I presume, how they are presented on the DRF guestlists?
In that case, I stand corrected.

However, in day to day life, a reference to their previous titles is, I dare say, not being used outside the court.

Yes, that is the same in my country. Only at the most formal events indeed. In daily life usually only the husband's name or the own name.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I don't think there will be any reference to her pre-marriage title.
As I see it she will simply be Fru Athena Schmidt-Jensen. - Or alternatively Fru Glücksborg, married to Hr. Schmidt-Jensen.
Or Fru Monpezat, perhaps. Or Fru Cavalier?

What about examples as Fru Anna Emilie von Lowzow født komtesse Lerche-Lerchenborg, Grevinde Christine Holstein-Holsteinborg født komtesse Reventlow, Baronesse Friderica Løvenskjold født komtesse Knuth, Fru Marie Antoniette Krieger von Lowzow født komtesse Bille-Brahe-Selby ?

That's, I presume, how they are presented on the DRF guestlists?

In all of the Danish royal guestlists which I have viewed, a former countess married to a commoner was presented as plain Mrs. without a reference to her pre-marriage title.

I am not familiar with the women Duc_et_Pair cited.

For an example eventual children of Froilán de Marichalar will not be a Grande but a plain Mr/Mrs/Ms.

I am not sure about that, as I explain in the Spanish titles thread: https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f21/titles-of-the-royal-family-3524-14.html#post2452029

I've seen some conflicting references, but I believe that Princess Dagmar, the latest (and first?) Danish princess who married a commoner, lost her rank and title.

Princess Dagmar married a Danish nobleman, Jørgen Castenskiold. No Princess of Denmark has married a commoner, although Princess Elisabeth would probably have married her commoner partner if the Queen had been willing to allow her to maintain her royal status after marriage.

But you are right that Princess Dagmar lost her rank and title. The Danish court calendar no longer presented her as a princess following her marriage.

King Christian X apparently insisted on higher standards for equal marriages than his successors. He likewise deemed Prince Aage's marriage to the Italian noblewoman Mathilde Calvi di Bergolo to be unequal.

 

[Stefan]

Would it not be possible for Countess Athena of Monpezat not to take her husbands name and simply keep her maiden name.

 

[Kataryn]

IMHO we either accept that a child or grandchild of the souvereign is a prince/princess, or we don't. But having rules that strips people of titles only because a cousin has a child don't make sense to me.



What I like in the UK is that it turns out you can hold a title and style but nor use it - by your own choice or by Royal command.


If you as a child of a monarch want your own children to be prince or princess - fine. But maybe the Souvereign could make it clear that in RL these princes or princesses are just known by a nobility title and their children will be nobles as well, rather than Royals?


They could even use a construct like Nicolai prince of Denmark known as Count Monpezat and in any situation apart from court he will be Count Monpezat and his children are Monpezats as well, but if he is invited to court he will be announced as a Prince of the country. I mean in a country that accepts nobility it should not be a problem. But in Norway we get a whole new class of former Royals, no? How will Sverre Magnus 's son be known as? It's easier with the Bernadottes, who can always use that name.

 

[JR76]

Would it not be possible for Countess Athena of Monpezat not to take her husbands name and simply keep her maiden name.

Naturally she could keep her surname, but she would loose her title. That's what happened to her father's second cousins when they married. The fact that they still go by their titles in the tabloids is another matter.

 

[Prinsara]

Naturally she could keep her surname, but she would loose her title. That's what happened to her father's second cousins when they married. The fact that they still go by their titles in the tabloids is another matter.

If you mean Carl Gustav’s sisters (aside from the one who was considered to have married equally) those are Joachim’s first cousins once removed, since they're his mother’s first cousins (Victoria, CP and Madeleine are his second cousins, sharing a great-grandparent). Not sure who else has had titles to lose relatively lately.

 

[Somebody]

Wouldn't loosing her royal title depend on whether she receives consent to marry or not? Of course, the Danish monarch of that time might adopt a policy somewhat similar as queen Beatrix used for her younger nephews (although that process would have included parliament) of not giving consent to grandchildren of a monarch (not by a heir) just to reduce the number of royals but if she would get consent, she could at least keep her style as highness and princess while loosing her 'komtesse de Monpezat'.

 

[Stefan]

If you mean Carl Gustav’s sisters (aside from the one who was considered to have married equally) those are Joachim’s first cousins once removed, since they're his mother’s first cousins (Victoria, CP and Madeleine are his second cousins, sharing a great-grandparent). Not sure who else has had titles to lose relatively lately.

I think he means three daughters of Count Christian of Rosenborg.

And i don't understand why shee needs to loose her title. Pricness Benedikte has keept hers and not taken on the title of her husband.