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

[kimebear]

If the appanage is the only sustainability concern, then why should there be a change to how titles are handed out in the future? Why should all future descendants of Margrethe II not bear the title of Princess or Prince to Denmark?

Why indeed? My comment is, of course, in reference to the growing trend of downsizing monarchies, which is fine going forward if that is what a monarch decides for their house.



To strip a family member of their titles for no apparent reason (i.e. how many people in Denmark were actually clamoring for this change in the first place?) is an unnecessary step to an already small family who would not have passed their titles down to the next generation anyway. It's not as if QM had nine children who went on to have huge families of their own.

(And why should Victoria de Marichalar, Maud Angelica Behn, Countess Eloise of Orange-Nassau and Zara Phillips not be Princesses, given that none of them will ever receive money from their respective royal houses' appanages?)

Because they were never entitled to be princesses, according to the laws of their monarchies at their birth. It's one thing to never have been given a title. It's quite another to have been titled from birth and have it taken from you for reasons that make little sense in the grand scheme of things.

 

[JR76]

"det er jeg ked af"

She's sure not saying she's sorry! That's more like "I noticed and I'm uncomfortable", right? Literally, "sad".

"Det er jeg ked af" in this context means "I am sorry about that/this." It might not be an outright apology (but then again, why should she apologize in public), but it's an admission of guilt.

 

[Prinsara]

"Det er jeg ked af" in this context means "I am sorry about that/this."

....I really do feel like there were other words if she was going to express any degree of regret or mistake, even with the execution of the decision.

However if she wants the wider world to take it as "I am sorry" (my fault/I apologize), I guess that is something in itself.

 

[Erin9]

So they decided to make this decision public without having the details worked out? Okay.

 

[Prinsara]

So they decided to make this decision public without having the details worked out? Okay.

Possibly details are getting reworked after all the uproar and attention.

Or it really was the equivalent of a brick through the window in style and subtlety, and they just threw it out in public without it being complete. It's hard to tell.

 

[llj]

The official English version you posted (thank you) translates it as "I am sorry". (ETA: Actually, you seem to be asking if there is a difference between the two versions; sorry if I misunderstood.)

Here it is in full for those who missed the link:



https://www.kongehuset.dk/en/news/statement-from-hm-the-queen

Very moving statement from the Queen. I can tell she did not anticipate this outcome. It's takes a lot of character to be able to own up to one's mistakes in such a public way. It was ultimately the right decision, however.

 

[Erin9]

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

Statement from the Queen
https://www.instagram.com/p/CjQgSkCDfRd/
https://www.kongehuset.dk/nyheder/udmelding-fra-h-m-dronningen

added (google translate so forgive any errors)

In recent days, there have been strong reactions to my decision on the future use of titles for Prince Joachim's four children. It obviously affects me.

My decision has been a long time coming. With my 50 years on the throne, it is natural both to look back and to look forward. It is my duty and my wish as Queen to ensure that the monarchy continues to shape itself in keeping with the times. It sometimes requires difficult decisions to be made, and it will always be difficult to find the right moment.

Carrying a royal title entails a number of obligations and duties, which will in future be the responsibility of fewer members of the royal family. This adaptation, which I see as a necessary safeguard for the future of the monarchy, I want to make in my time.

I have made my decision as Queen, mother and grandmother, but as a mother and grandmother I have underestimated how much my youngest son and his family feel affected. It makes a big impression, and I'm sorry for that.

No one should be in doubt that my children, children-in-law and grandchildren are my great joy and pride. I now hope that we as a family can find the peace to find our way through this situation ourselves.


Margaret R

Wow. I’m surprised she responded to the criticism.

I do like that she made the point that it’s difficult to know when to do these things. Based on this board alone- I certainly agree.

She admitted she underestimated how hurt her son’s family is. (Hurt, not angry- is what I’ve gotten from them.) She’d have known this if this had been communicated properly and personally. But- I think the acknowledgment is nice: She didn’t get it. I thought that might have been the case when she seemed taken aback that her grandchildren were upset.

Very nice that she explicitly stated her “joy and pride” in her family. I think that needed to be stated, based on how genuinely hurt I think her family has been.

I think (hope) the conclusion of her statement means there’s agreement across the board to handle things privately going forward. It’s in everyone’s best interests.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Because they were never entitled to be princesses, according to the laws of their monarchies at their birth. It's one thing to never have been given a title. It's quite another to have been titled from birth and have it taken from you for reasons that make little sense in the grand scheme of things.

I think you overlooked the last paragraph of my comment, which recognized the difference between never being given a title compared to having an existing one taken away as an adult:

There are other arguments against stripping titles from adults who have carried them for the entirety of their lives, [...]

My comment was questioning the specific argument (which many, many people have raised) that royal titles are unproblematic as long as they do not entitle the bearer to taxpayer money. That particular argument is equally true for generations going forward (no one expects Nikolai's potential children to receive an appanage when their father does not) and living people, so if it "makes little sense" for living people then it also makes little sense for generations going forward.

Why indeed? My comment is, of course, in reference to the growing trend of downsizing monarchies, which is fine going forward if that is what a monarch decides for their house.

Perhaps I misunderstood, if your position is that it is fine for a monarch to downsize going forward but it is not actually necessary.

 

[angieuk]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...cult-decision-strip-grandchildren-titles.html

The Queen speaks about the difficult decision she had to make. The UK journalists are covering this with interest.

 

[Erin9]

Possibly details are getting reworked after all the uproar and attention.

Or it really was the equivalent of a brick through the window in style and subtlety, and they just threw it out in public without it being complete. It's hard to tell.

True. Could be either way.

No matter what- it speaks to the exceedingly poor manner in which this was handled.

Given the clear lack of communication- it wouldn’t stun me if there were details no one thought about…..until now.

 

[kimebear]

My comment was questioning the specific argument (which many, many people have raised) that royal titles are unproblematic as long as they do not entitle the bearer to taxpayer money. That particular argument is equally true for generations going forward (no one expects Nikolai's potential children to receive an appanage when their father does not) and living people, so if it "makes little sense" for living people then it also makes little sense for generations going forward.

Perhaps I misunderstood, if your position is that it is fine for a monarch to downsize going forward but it is not actually necessary.

My opinion on the entire matter is that I don't see the need to downsize current monarchies if the citizens aren't specifically requesting it, and even less so if there is no money involved, since public funding tends to provoke more passionate positions.

The whole problem with this entire fiasco (IMHO) is QM unnecessarily taking titles away from those who already carry them. If a smaller monarchy is desired, decrees can be made regarding future descendants, which could easily limit the number of titled individuals and achieve an organic downsizing without this PR mess of callous blunders and hurt feelings.

 

[Somebody]

I wonder if "find[ing] a way through this situation" could involve some degree of reconsideration of the Queen's decision. I don't see Nikolai and Felix walking away from potential negotiations with the right to pass their royal titles and status on to their future wives and children, but could there be a more modest compromise?

For example, could they revert to the earlier plan (according to Countess Alexandra's press secretary) of removing the titles on marriage? I agree with Queen Claude and Mbruno that although the Danish royal house has a long history of removing titles upon marriage, it may be perceived more negatively with 21st-century optics. However, Countess Alexandra going on the record with CNN to say that she and her sons would have preferred having the titles removed on marriage could provide some cover to the Queen if she reverts to the old plan.

It's quite a statement from the queen. I don't read it as if she is considering changing her decision (she reiterates why it was important to make it - and also clearly stated that she wanted to do it in her time (which I do link to the timing not long after queen Elizabeth's death; she doesn't know how much longer she'll be around). 'Working through this situation' to me seems to mean that they will have to work on healing the rift that her decision and Joachim's family's response to it caused.

Her press secretary's response on 'details being finalized' (before this press release) seems to be a way to avoid answering any questions. Imho it doesn't necessarily mean that things weren't thought through but could as well be a way to let HM speak instead of answering all kinds of detailed questions - alternatively, there might be some minor details that could be changed if that would help Joachim (to accept this decision - as I don't think there is any going back on the decision itself).

 

[Muhler]

"det er jeg ked af"

She's sure not saying she's sorry! That's more like "I noticed and I'm uncomfortable", right? Literally, "sad".

It works better in English - "sorry". Pretty sure Amalienborg knows that too.

At least she is expressing some kind of regret over how this happened, which I guess is better than the deafening nothing the original press release was flung into.

Going into translation-geek mode:
I think the best translation of the nuance of that is: I feel sorry for/about that.

It is IMO not a full and unreserved apology.

Wow. I’m surprised she responded to the criticism.

I do like that she made the point that it’s difficult to know when to do these things. Based on this board alone- I certainly agree.

She admitted she underestimated how hurt her son’s family is. (Hurt, not angry- is what I’ve gotten from them.) She’d have known this if this had been communicated properly and personally. But- I think the acknowledgment is nice: She didn’t get it. I thought that might have been the case when she seemed taken aback that her grandchildren were upset.

Very nice that she explicitly stated her “joy and pride” in her family. I think that needed to be stated, based on how genuinely hurt I think her family has been.

I think (hope) the conclusion of her statement means there’s agreement across the board to handle things privately going forward. It’s in everyone’s best interests.

QMII's normal way of handling this, regardless of her personal feelings, would be to say nothing.

This is damage control as well a elaboration aimed at the public.
As the Monarch she is perhaps not able to give a full apology as that would imply that the decision was wrong - and as such needs to be taken back. That is not possible now and that is not her opinion.
She still believe her decision was right and at the right time.

I think someone persuaded her to send out that statement and as Frederik returned today - there is one obvious candidate for that "someone."

- I do find it slightly ominous that she refers to the decision having to be made while she is alive - in her time. (Or at least in her reign...)
But I also suspect a legal advisor has had a careful look at the wording of this statement, however personal it is.

 

[ppetrica]

So we had this so far:
- a poorly communicated decision about the titles
- Joachim's family running to the media 3 minutes after the court's announcement, and that was only the beginning
- the Queen publicly admitting that it was performed badly and in a way apologizing (and stating her feelings for her family)
- only shortly before that Joachim's family simply states that they won't comment on it publicly anymore

What I lack here is Joachim's family's acknowledgement that they also acted poorly.
After all, they turned this into a Jerry Springer show, instead of simply issuing a short statement and then solving this privately inside the family.
And then after the final agreement, new final statement (or 2 separate statements, whatever suits them better) should have been issued.
Less stress for everyone, especially for two youngest children.

 

[Princess Mahala]

Its interesting we keep falling back to "Joachim is the 'most' royal etc. Because I ask myself - well who helped make him like that? Oh yes, Margrethe the Queen of formality and "properness". He is a making of his parents but his love of status and royalty strikes me as more in line with his mother than his father tbh. I also don't believe they both (his mother and father) did enough to prepare him for life outside the RF - they lumbered him with an estate to farm regardless of his own thoughts on it. They seem to have bought him up IMO to be really rather royal with not much else to try his hand at. Farming in the way Schackenborg requires was never going to be a full time job for Joachim, he was always going to be a "gentleman farmer" meaning much of his time would still need filling. This is IMO the problem in a lot of RFs - they want to slim down but have people / family members who haven't really ever had to do anything else. That's why IMO it can't be an "overnight" fix but needs to be a more gradual approach. I don't think taking titles away is really the answer, it needs to be more a case of seeing where those titles are and changing the rules accordingly, possibly making those with them now personal titles instead of ones that can be inherited/gained on marriage etc.

Agree with this entirely?.

After reading the queen's statement on wanting to usher in change during her life my take on idea of "slimming down" (any) royal families is I don't think is smart for them in terms of longevity and survival. It feels shortsighted and may come back to haunt them eventually. They believe it will be easier to manage and also will look and sound better (mostly financially) to the public but ultimately it solidifies how unnecessary and obsolete royalty is today; if positions or titles can be so easily demoted/gotten rid of, especially of those who have dutifully "served" their family or brought in interest, then why should any of them matter. Many have more than enough to provide lavishly for their members for generations but are instead choosing to cut them off which will leads to shameful books deals and profiting off the family name, (not a good look). Like the quoted post said (I'm paraphrasing) what are these pampered people expected to do outside of that environment they dedicated their lives to?

Now I don't know exactly how this affects a line of succession but what if the day comes and there's a disruption to the process? Could happen for many reasons, it's happened before. Will it be assumed a member whose branch had been "phased" into "normal life" will take on the role or want it for their non titled children who'll have had even less public exposure? The people might not appreciate that...

Sorry for the rant but it all seems like these monarchs are slowly ushering in the end of royal houses not protecting their future.

 

[Kataryn]

It's more fun to say. Quite seriously.

It also sees use in popular culture like The Crown, which must in itself have gotten the idea from somewhere.

Glücksburg is a moated castle in today's Germany, near Flensburg. It was build in 1580-87 by the third son of king Christian III. of Denmark, Johann the Younger (in Danish: Hans den Yngre) whose brother Frederick II. gave him lands and formed the duchy of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg for him.



The Royal family at that time were the former reigning Counts of Oldenburg and dukes of Schlewsig-Holstein, who had inherited Denmark's throne after the former (male-line) Royal family had died out and they were the next via the female line in descent from king Valdemar the Great). First king of that line was Christian I. The family held the lands of Schleswig and Holstein under Danish rule till the Prussian won the German-Danish war in 1864 and Schleswig-Holstein became a German Federal State in 1946, but the titles of the family exist till today (as names only in Germany!)



When Hans den Yngre died in Glücksburg Castle he left the castle with part of his lands to his fifth son Philip, who became the first Duke of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg. When this line died out, the title fell back to the Danish king.


In 1825, a prince from the Danish Royal line of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Beck (another of the small duchies Hans den Yngre had parted his lands into, left to another of his sons), Frederik William, married the sister of king Frederick VI.'s queen. To celebrate that, his brother-in-law created the prince as Duke of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg. That's the line the Royal Houses of Denmark, Norway, Greece and now the Uk all descend from.



Because due to the close relation and contact, when again the Royal male line was about to die out, the Danish parliament of that time elected the Duke Frederick William's son Christian as heir presumptive in 1853, he became king as Christian IX. (He is the king who was thought of as the grandfather of Europe's monarchies).



So even though the Royal families all prefer the shortened name of "Glücksborg" for their dynasties, it is in fact a minor line of the Danish Royal House who reigned the SHSG-duchy, which became the male-line when the elder lines died out. And the long name is because in German nobility, minor lines take the territorital destination of the main line they are descended from and add the name of the little piece of land they inherited as part of the name to distinguish them from other lines. And as older and more major lines died out, even a prince of SHSG had a chance to be voted in as the new king as he was related to the late kings of the country in the paternal line.



Today, though, with no more death through diseases of the children and no more deaths of Royals in military service, the chances that Prince Joachim's children are needed for the throne are completely different from these times.



Hope this helps!

 

[polyesco]

So we had this so far:
- a poorly communicated decision about the titles
- Joachim's family running to the media 3 minutes after the court's announcement, and that was only the beginning
- the Queen publicly admitting that it was performed badly and in a way apologizing (and stating her feelings for her family)
- only shortly before that Joachim's family simply states that they won't comment on it publicly anymore

What I lack here is Joachim's family's acknowledgement that they also acted poorly.
After all, they turned this into a Jerry Springer show, instead of simply issuing a short statement and then solving this privately inside the family.
And then after the final agreement, new final statement (or 2 separate statements, whatever suits them better) should have been issued.
Less stress for everyone, especially for two youngest children.

I agree.
That was one of the main things I took from the Queen's statement today. She acknowledges that her son and family are hurt and she is sorry for that.
Everything else will be handled in private.

But she also emphasizes that this decision is one she takes looking at the future and as a Monarch, yes, sometimes difficult decisions are needed.

I particularly like this sentence "Holding a royal title involves a number of commitments and duties that, in the future, will lie with fewer members of the royal family.".
Indeed. Commitments and duties come with titles.

 

[Kataryn]

What I lack here is Joachim's family's acknowledgement that they also acted poorly.

Are you a part of the Royal family, a lawyer asked to represent one of the parties involved here or a judge?


Maybe Joachim & Co. already acknowledged that to his mother and she, in turn, agreed it wasn't wise what she did? Who knows? And who has a right to complain as we only know about this reaction because Joachim's side went public....



IMHO we should discuss here about what has been published by either side or the media but accept that this what we get to know. We should IMHO not ask for more exposure from private people. (I guess that's why speculations are not encouraged here).

 

[Erin9]

Going into translation-geek mode:

I think the best translation of the nuance of that is: I feel sorry for/about that.



It is IMO not a full and unreserved apology.







QMII's normal way of handling this, regardless of her personal feelings, would be to say nothing.



This is damage control as well a elaboration aimed at the public.

As the Monarch she is perhaps not able to give a full apology as that would imply that the decision was wrong - and as such needs to be taken back. That is not possible now and that is not her opinion.

She still believe her decision was right and at the right time.



I think someone persuaded her to send out that statement and as Frederik returned today - there is one obvious candidate for that "someone."



- I do find it slightly ominous that she refers to the decision having to be made while she is alive - in her time. (Or at least in her reign...)

But I also suspect a legal advisor has had a careful look at the wording of this statement, however personal it is.

Thanks for the additional insight.

Very interesting to me that normally she really would just say nothing. I’m surprised/impressed any form of apology was included. Telling.

It read as damage control to me- as well- which imo was absolutely needed.

Frederick does seem to be a likely candidate to recommend a statement. She wanted this handled in her reign- but this mess hasn’t really done him any favors thus far imo.

Agree with this entirely[emoji106].



After reading the queen's statement on wanting to usher in change during her life my take on idea of "slimming down" (any) royal families is I don't think is smart for them in terms of longevity and survival. It feels shortsighted and may come back to haunt them eventually. They believe it will be easier to manage and also will look and sound better (mostly financially) to the public but ultimately it solidifies how unnecessary and obsolete royalty is today; if positions or titles can be so easily demoted/gotten rid of, especially of those who have dutifully "served" their family or brought in interest, then why should any of them matter. Many have more than enough to provide lavishly for their members for generations but are instead choosing to cut them off which will leads to shameful books deals and profiting off the family name, (not a good look). Like the quoted post said (I'm paraphrasing) what are these pampered people expected to do outside of that environment they dedicated their lives to?



Now I don't know exactly how this affects a line of succession but what if the day comes and there's a disruption to the process? Could happen for many reasons, it's happened before. Will it be assumed a member whose branch had been "phased" into "normal life" will take on the role or want it for their non titled children who'll have had even less public exposure? The people might not appreciate that...



Sorry for the rant but it all seems like these monarchs are slowly ushering in the end of royal houses not protecting their future.

I think that’s a valid point. I think you can easily get to the point of: why a monarchy at all?

Just strictly speaking- “royal family” won’t be an appropriate term if they just keep cutting titles or waiting to see if they “need” them- then cutting, etc.

Having to ask some one to join the RF and give a title because there is a need could also become an issue, as you said.

 

[Izzie]

Thanks for the additional insight.

Very interesting to me that normally she really would just say nothing. I’m surprised/impressed any form of apology was included. Telling.

It read as damage control to me- as well- which imo was absolutely needed.

Frederick does seem to be a likely candidate to recommend a statement. She wanted this handled in her reign- but this mess hasn’t really done him any favors thus far imo.

The whole argument being used that she wanted to spare Frederik having to deal with this during his reign becomes moot when it appears that ultimately HE may have been the one ending up having to deal with it anyway!

As an aside: The portion that state that in the future duties will be carried out by less people...they may want to be careful what they wish for and not end up "slimming down" themselves out of existence and relevance. If there are 3-4 people only how much work can they actually handle that will justify paying them an apanage? How long before they look like just a waste of money if the ROI is not in proportion to what is being paid them? IMO the better way would be to look at the roles of each member of the royal family and work on better defining each and making sure that there are "job descriptions" (for lack of a better phrase) for each. That way roles are defined and much clearer. Maybe that is a more effective and efficient way to ensure the future.

 

[kalnel]

Did anyone else notice the similarity in the wording of Queen Margrethe's statement and the statement Queen Elizabeth made after Diana died?

QM: "I have made my decision as Queen, mother and grandmother, but as a mother and grandmother..."

QE: "So what I say to you now, as your Queen and as a grandmother, I say from the heart..."

 

[Prinsara]

Did anyone else notice the similarity in the wording of Queen Margrethe's statement and the statement Queen Elizabeth made after Diana died?

QM: "I have made my decision as Queen, mother and grandmother, but as a mother and grandmother..."

QE: "So what I say to you now, as your Queen and as a grandmother, I say from the heart..."

Why would it be surprising if she went and consulted her friend and model's major "mea-culpa-damage-control-even though this goes against my personality and beliefs" moment?

However, they are/were actually both grandmothers and Queens regnant. It's hard to phrase those as anything else, and in this case Margrethe being a grandmother is far more relevant to the situation than in Elizabeth's.

Edit: And now I'm picturing Daisy (furiously smoking, needlepointing and) spending the weekend watching The Queen.

 

[FigTree]

The whole argument being used that she wanted to spare Frederik having to deal with this during his reign becomes moot when it appears that ultimately HE may have been the one ending up having to deal with it anyway!

As an aside: The portion that state that in the future duties will be carried out by less people...they may want to be careful what they wish for and not end up "slimming down" themselves out of existence and relevance. If there are 3-4 people only how much work can they actually handle that will justify paying them an apanage? How long before they look like just a waste of money if the ROI is not in proportion to what is being paid them? IMO the better way would be to look at the roles of each member of the royal family and work on better defining each and making sure that there are "job descriptions" (for lack of a better phrase) for each. That way roles are defined and much clearer. Maybe that is a more effective and efficient way to ensure the future.

That is they way all over. You can’t hold back the tide with a broomstick. And let’s be fair when there were loads of them very few did any work. It was only in recent times they did but they also did things we don’t need royals to do. Diana opened a shopping centre near me 40 years ago…royals don’t do that now. So as their role gets smaller and more specified we don’t need so many of them turning up to the opening of a postal letter. She is right, titles go with role. As it should.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

(..)

So even though the Royal families all prefer the shortened name of "Glücksborg" for their dynasties, it is in fact a minor line of the Danish Royal House who reigned the SHSG-duchy, which became the male-line when the elder lines died out.

Well, but if we are to refer to dynasties using the names of every feudal state ever reigned over by their male-line ancestors, then we had better refer to the Bourbons as "Bourbon-La Marche-Vendome-France".

But nobody seems to do that. Why only for the Glücksburgs?

In 1825, a prince from the Danish Royal line of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Beck (another of the small duchies Hans den Yngre had parted his lands into, left to another of his sons), Frederik William, married the sister of king Frederick VI.'s queen. To celebrate that, his brother-in-law created the prince as Duke of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg. That's the line the Royal Houses of Denmark, Norway, Greece and now the Uk all descend from.

Actually, he created him "Duke of Glücksburg".

Royal Patent of 6 July 1825 concerning the title of Duke of Glücksburg

 

[kalnel]

Why would it be surprising if she went and consulted her friend and model's major "mea-culpa-damage-control-even though this goes against my personality and beliefs" moment?

However, they are/were actually both grandmothers and Queens regnant. It's hard to phrase those as anything else, and in this case Margrethe being a grandmother is far more relevant to the situation than in Elizabeth's.

Edit: And now I'm picturing Daisy (furiously smoking, needlepointing and) spending the weekend watching The Queen. [emoji38]

I didn't say it was surprising. I just asked if anyone else had noticed it.

 

[suztav]

It was pretty big of her to say anything at all. Her reasoning for doing what she did is totally logical -- her methodology for communicating with all parties could have been handled a bit better.

I think Frederik and Mary had a very large role in this public statement.

JMHO.

 

[MsJulie]

Very simple, the Queen messed up in this matter. Now other Royal families will think hard, be more open, listen before they act, I eould hope. Swedens way of handling the working royals, HRH, and prince/princess was a good model. I think this will take a long time to heal over, or never.jmoo

 

[Princess Thyra]

A little bit of empathy goes a long way. I think it's a good statement from her team.

I agree! I sighed in relief at reading it. The original was more brutal than what has often come out of the BRF (which I am not a big fan of), and thought it would not be followed up on (like the BRF often does-just stiff upper lip and no further comment, etc.). Yet, we got this from QM. Not perfect but goes a long way to mending the fences and restoring my faith in Denmark and the DRF.

 

[Izzie]

I agree! I sighed in relief at reading it. The original was more brutal than what has often come out of the BRF (which I am not a big fan of), and thought it would not be followed up on (like the BRF often does-just stiff upper lip and no further comment, etc.). Yet, we got this from QM. Not perfect but goes a long way to mending the fences and restoring my faith in Denmark and the DRF.

My gut says Frederik is to thank for this statement. He returns to Denmark and all of a sudden the statement comes out, Joachim and co say they will not be speaking publicly anymore and on top of that now it is stated details of this decision are not finalized leaving them a loophole.

 

[Reinosa]

It is a good letter. I liked it because she tells her love for Joachim's family, something that was lacking in the previous days.

I'm sure that it won't be a popular comment here, but from the very beginning I thought it would be fair to quit the titles of the two younger Federik and Mary's children. They will never be king or queen of Denmark and will have to live by their own means just like Joachim's children. It would be fair to keep the prince or princess title only for the heir and the next in line. And do it now.

When there was a little interview and Mary was asked about what would be her thoughts if her own children were in the same situations Joachim's children are, she acted like she hadn't understood the question and said something like "she didn't know what things were going to be like in Christian's time". She is sure that her own children are going to be untouched not only during QM's time but during her husband's time too. It didn't sound well to me.

I'm glad Margrethe said to her younger son and her grandchildren she is sorry about what they are feeling because she loves them. I think that if she takes the same decision about her other grandchildren and even her own sister, it would be better for all her family.