Arveprins Knud & Arveprinsesse Caroline Mathilde

[Princess Robijn]

Originally Posted by MargreteI

I would think so is William and Harry. Not 100% sure, but allmost.

I don't think Phillip - Charles - William - Harry - Andew - Beatrice - Eugenie - Edward - Louise hold the title Prince(ss) of Greece and Denmark

From: http://www.royal.gov.uk/OutPut/Page413.asp


BACKGROUND

Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Merioneth and Baron Greenwich, was born Prince of Greece and Denmark in Corfu on 10 June 1921.

He was born the only son of Prince Andrew of Greece. His paternal family is of Danish descent - Prince Andrew was the grandson of King Christian IX of Denmark.

His mother was Princess Alice of Battenberg, the eldest child of Prince Louis of Battenberg and sister of Earl Mountbatten of Burma. Prince Louis became a naturalised British subject in 1868, joined the Royal Navy and rose to become an Admiral of the Fleet and First Sea Lord in 1914.

During the First World War Prince Louis changed the family name to Mountbatten and was created Marquess of Milford Haven. Prince Philip adopted the family name of Mountbatten when he became a naturalised British subject and renounced his Royal title in 1947.
Prince Louis married one of Queen Victoria's granddaughters. Thus, The Queen and Prince Philip both have Queen Victoria as a great-great-grandmother. They are also related through his father's side. His paternal grandfather, King George I of Greece, was Queen Alexandra's brother

[Furienna]

Knud sure looks like his brother Frederik.

In one way, it's sad, that Knud and his sons were put aside in favor of Margarethe. In one way, I understand it, as Margarethe was the oldest child of a monarch. But it's also sad, that the family line from Christian IX will cease to inherit the thrown. (Margarethe belongs to his blood line, but her sons and grandsons don't.)

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by Furienna

Knud sure looks like his brother Frederik.

In one way, it's sad, that Knud and his sons were put aside in favor of Margarethe. In one way, I understand it, as Margarethe was the oldest child of a monarch. But it's also sad, that the family line from Christian IX will cease to inherit the thrown. (Margarethe belongs to his blood line, but her sons and grandsons don't.)

After we had this "bloodline" discussion in the Japan-forum, I checked the information about DNA and it says that you can trace the maternal grandfather's DNA down to the grandson. Thus, one could trace Christian IX.'s DNA-material down to Frederick. What is this if not a "blood line"?

For me it is discriminating to concentrate on male line inheritance only when it is proven that both mother and father add DNA-details inherited from their ancestors to their child's DNA.

[auntie]

Hypothetically thinking, if only men could reign, and Prince Knud's sons were knocked off the list for marrying morgonatically, who would be the king today?

[UserDane]

Originally Posted by Furienna

But it's also sad, that the family line from Christian IX will cease to inherit the thrown. (Margarethe belongs to his blood line, but her sons and grandsons don't.)

Since I have a great respect for warnings from the admins I won't even put down in writing what I really think of this statement

So now the bloodlines in Norway, Belgium and Holland and perhaps Spain will cease when the firstborn princess take over from their fathers....???

[H.M. Margrethe]

Originally Posted by auntie

Hypothetically thinking, if only men could reign, and Prince Knud's sons were knocked off the list for marrying morgonatically, who would be the king today?

It woud either be CP Frederik of Denmark or Prince Gustav of Berleburg.

[auntie]

Originally Posted by H.M. Margrethe

It woud either be CP Frederik of Denmark or Prince Gustav of Berleburg.

Let me rephrase, if the monarch would be only from the male line, who would reign today?

[Furienna]

Originally Posted by auntie

Hypothetically thinking, if only men could reign, and Prince Knud's sons were knocked off the list for marrying morgonatically, who would be the king today?

I think the law would be changed, so that woman could reign, but males would still come before females, so that Margarethe would have become queen anyway. Or maybe prince Knud's sons would still have been allowed to inherit the thrown if they were "real" heirs and wasn't just "dead weight".

Originally Posted by UserDane

Since I have a great respect for warnings from the admins I won't even put down in writing what I really think of this statement

So now the bloodlines in Norway, Belgium and Holland and perhaps Spain will cease when the firstborn princess take over from their fathers....???

So just because you don't agree with me, and that you wish for a feminist shangri-la with only female monarchs, I'm wacko? Well, I'm glad you respect the admins, because you sure don't respect me. And yes, every time a ruling queen has to leave her thrown to her children, a blood line ceases to to sit on the thrown.

[Furienna]

Originally Posted by auntie

Let me rephrase, if the monarch would be only from the male line, who would reign today?

As I said, I think the law would have been changed anyway. They would have had to.

[auntie]

Originally Posted by Furienna

I think the law would be changed, so that woman could reign, but males would still come before females, so that Margarethe would have become queen anyway. Or maybe prince Knud's sons would still have been allowed to inherit the thrown if they were "real" heirs and wasn't just "dead weight".



So just because you don't agree with me, and that you wish for a feminist shangri-la with only female monarchs, I'm wacko? Well, I'm glad you respect the admins, because you sure don't respect me. And yes, every time a ruling queen has to leave her thrown to her children, a blood line ceases to to sit on the thrown.

2 Questions:

1)What do you mean by dead weight?
2)I agree with you, if there's no choice, only girls, than let her reign, but if there is boys, I think the boys should reign, not because they are better, but because it causes more personal conflicts for a woman to rule.

[auntie]

Originally Posted by Furienna

As I said, I think the law would have been changed anyway. They would have had to.

But if not, hypothetically speaking, which MAN is in line after Prince Knud's sons???

[UserDane]

Originally Posted by Furienna

So just because you don't agree with me, and that you wish for a feminist shangri-la with only female monarchs, I'm wacko? Well, I'm glad you respect the admins, because you sure don't respect me. And yes, every time a ruling queen has to leave her thrown to her children, a blood line ceases to to sit on the thrown.

Giving equal rights to both sexes is hardly a feminist shangri-la in my book! I don't dispute the rights of first-borns - irrespective of sex - to become regent eventually. It is you who dispute the rights of firstborn females - which IMO is frighteningly old-fashioned and outdated.

[Empress]

Originally Posted by MargreteI

I would think so is William and Harry. Not 100% sure, but allmost.

Are we sure that Charles carries the titles Prince of Greece and Denmark? I thought that Philip renounced these when he became a Mountbatten, and therefore could not pass them on.

What exactly is an Arveprins?

[H.M. Margrethe]

Originally Posted by Empress

Are we sure that Charles carries the titles Prince of Greece and Denmark? I thought that Philip renounced these when he became a Mountbatten, and therefore could not pass them on.

What exactly is an Arveprins?

An Arveprins is the same as a heir presumptive.

[juliana]

Originally Posted by UserDane

So now the bloodlines in Norway, Belgium and Holland and perhaps Spain will cease when the firstborn princess take over from their fathers....???

Genealogically the female x-chromosomes can't be used in the same way as the male y-chromosomes, which are a valuable tool for the verification of an individual's male ancestry because it is passed on exclusively from father to son. Therefore all the queen regnants' sons no longer have the royal ancestry y- chromosomes. The Danish heir's y-chromosomes will only go back to his French ancestry- there will be no connection to the Danish royal male ancestors through that feature. It will affect the future queens too now that the male primogeniture has been replaced. Of course the dna tests will prove ancestry but the traditional male line inheritance now will be lost.

[UserDane]

Originally Posted by juliana

Genealogically the female x-chromosomes can't be used in the same way as the male y-chromosomes, which are a valuable tool for the verification of an individual's male ancestry because it is passed on exclusively from father to son. Therefore all the queen regnants' sons no longer have the royal ancestry y- chromosomes. The Danish heir's y-chromosomes will only go back to his French ancestry- there will be no connection to the Danish royal male ancestors through that feature. It will affect the future queens too now that the male primogeniture has been replaced. Of course the dna tests will prove ancestry but the traditional male line inheritance now will be lost.

Thanks, Juliana, that was interesting.
What then about the verification of an individual's female ancestry? Irrespective of whether the y-chromosomes are traceable, children of both sexes will be their parents' children I suppose and inherit whatever in the eyes of others make them their children.

What I oppose is the seeming exclusion of the importance of the female aspects and rights - and that a female should be considered a lesser choice as regent. I think we have ample evidence that this is not the case. I cannot make myself think that a male is more suited as a successor - even if his chromosomes will be traceable.

[H.M. Margrethe]

Originally Posted by auntie

But if not, hypothetically speaking, which MAN is in line after Prince Knud's sons???

I guess ther is no man in line after Prince Knud´s sons since the did not have anny.

[norwegianne]

Originally Posted by auntie

But if not, hypothetically speaking, which MAN is in line after Prince Knud's sons???

Hypothetically speaking -

From 24 May 1949-27 Mar 1953, the line to the throne looked like this, according to http://members.fortunecity.com/succe...s/denmark.html (I edited out Prince Aage, who shouldn't have been on the list, as he died in 1940):

01. HRH Knud Hereditary Prince of Denmark (Died 1976, would have been king for four years)
02. HH Ingold Prince of Denmark (married a commoner in 1968)
03. HH Christian Prince of Denmark (married a commoner in 1971)
04. HH Gorm Prince of Denmark (Never married, died in 1991, would have been king from 1976 - 1991)
05. HH Axel Prince of Denmark (died in 1964)
06. HH Georg Prince of Denmark (died in 1986)
07. HM Paul King of the Hellenes, Prince of Denmark (Died 1964)
08. HRH Constantine Crown Prince of Greece, Prince of Denmark (From 1991)
09. HRH George Prince of Greece and Denmark (died 1957)
10. HRH Peter Prince of Greece and Denmark (Died 1980)
(11. HRH Philip Prince of Greece and Denmark, Duke of Edinburgh
12. HRH Charles Prince of Greece and Denmark, Prince of Edinburgh (since 6 Feb 1952: Prince of Greece and Denmark, Duke of Cornwall and Rothesay )
11/13 HRH Michael Prince of Greece and Denmark

It's all hypothetical - though - have to put an emphasis on that, as I was misunderstood earlier when I played with hypotheticals.

By the time Gorm died, Constantine and Anne-Marie would have been out of Greece for so many years that they wouldn't necessarily have had a problem with "two thrones"...

It would seem, though, that the Danish royal house, had the succession laws not changed, were kind of shooting themselves in the foot with this "marrying a commoner - lose the rights to the throne thing." On the other hand, Constantine and Anne-Marie does have three sons, and Pavlos has three sons, so maybe nature sorts itself out?

[Daneborn]

That was really interesting reading, Norwegianne.

First of all, Christian and Ingolf may not have married commoners without the King's consent had they still been in line and within the possibility of becoming King themselves.

Secondly, I bet Konstantin and Anne-Marie would have turned away from the Greek, accepted the Greek referendum, and embraced the opportunity to become King & Queen in the world's oldest monarchy. At least, I think the Danes would have been able to live with it too as Anne-Marie still is considered as she belongs to the Danish RF.

And all this would leave Queen Margrethe to have her own career as an archeologist, designer, director or whatever she might have desired. Whereas most of the above mentioned don't seem to have any other talent to benefit from through life. Interesting thought.

[auntie]

Thanks for all the info! I always thought that Constatine and Anne Marie are good kingly\queenly material!