Queen Louise of Denmark (1851 - 1926)

[grandlordbenji16]

i would've done the same thing she never try to fit in at first all she does in write to her mother in sweden and when she visit there she would have difficulty coming back to denmark i think she was homesick ingrid is much better a princess of sweden at birth but a danish queen at heart . she was stiff by the way look at most of the pics when most princess are laughing in pics she was serious like it was official portrait

[Vasillisos Markos]

Originally Posted by snowflower

I am surprised that, of all people, Queen Mary was the one who had the nerve to characterize Lovisa as stiff .

Queen Mary was very proper but I don't believe she was "stiff" as we commonly think that word implies. From everything I have read, it appears QM had a delicious sense of humor and behind closed doors she was delightful and fun company.

[Simply Amazing]

Originally Posted by snowflower

I am surprised that, of all people, Queen Mary was the one who had the nerve to characterize Lovisa as stiff .

Lovisa did have a hard time at Denmark. Her husband showed her in every way that he only tolerated her because of her large dowry, her mother in law judged her hard on etiquette and table manner ( she was a faste eater I think and Louise didn't like that), Frederick's sisters found her too serious to deal with and once her nephews became a little older they started making fun of her too ( it was Nicholas and George of Greece who came up with the "Swan" nickname) Lovisa in her turn became very cold towards them and she often said that , of all the family, it was only Queen Olga who was actually sweet with her and seemed to show some true kindness to her. Nevertheless, I think that Alexandra and Dagmar did became friendlier to her during their widowhoods and the sorrows they faced during their last years.

Well said! You know, I've had the benefit of reading the official bios of both Alix and Dagmar, and given the treatment they metted out to their daughters-in-law (namely Queen Mary and Empress Alexandra, respectively), it really is no great shock to learn that they were indifferent towards their eldest brother's wife. Furthermore, Lovisa may very well have been rigid and dare I say, embittered, towards her lot in life and as a result, channelled that frustration in her relationships with her family, but Queen Mary was never the best person qualified to issue such criticism.

[Viv]

IMO the fate of Queen Lovisa is one of the less charming chapters of Danish royal history. She was said to be gauche when she first came to Denmark, but how unusual is that for a 17-18 year old girl being shipped off to a new life with a new family in a foreign country?
Anyway, I for one am wondering whether she was vilified because she actually was rigid or 'strange' or 'difficult' to begin with or whether she was embittered later in life because she was ill-treated by her Danish relations, particularly her better looking sisters-in-law?. Apparently they maintained a strong influence at the Danish court despite living in the UK and Russia respectively. Again IMO there was nothing strange in Lovisa's Christian faith as such, however the unusual thing was that it was a very right wing, austere version of Christianity. It must have filled a void in her life.

Or maybe jealousy played a part in this sad tale? She arrived with her dowry and jewellery! It must have been a thorn in the side of the impoverished Danish royal family, keen to meddle with the more illustrious RFs in Europe!

I'm intrigued by Lovisa's story and I wish that it would be properly researched some day.

Viv

[theresa_225]

Originally Posted by snowflower

I am surprised that, of all people, Queen Mary was the one who had the nerve to characterize Lovisa as stiff .

Lovisa did have a hard time at Denmark. Her husband showed her in every way that he only tolerated her because of her large dowry, her mother in law judged her hard on etiquette and table manner ( she was a faste eater I think and Louise didn't like that), Frederick's sisters found her too serious to deal with and once her nephews became a little older they started making fun of her too ( it was Nicholas and George of Greece who came up with the "Swan" nickname) Lovisa in her turn became very cold towards them and she often said that , of all the family, it was only Queen Olga who was actually sweet with her and seemed to show some true kindness to her. Nevertheless, I think that Alexandra and Dagmar did became friendlier to her during their widowhoods and the sorrows they faced during their last years.

Because she was a fast eater, her nephews and nieces called her "Aunt Hallelujah." Not very nice I suppose...
If I am not mistaken, one of the reason she was called "Swan" was because her overly long neck. There is another reason but it slips my mind.
The next king was not fond of Dagmar because of her treatment towards his mother. I do not have the exact source now, so correct me if I'm wrong

[theresa_225]

Originally Posted by Marengo

I was wondering if Queen Louise had a bad relationship with all her in-laws or were there some that actually were nice to her? From what I have read most of the family mocked her and weren't exactly nice *though they didn't mind Louise's huge dowry). Did King Christian VIII and Queen Louise ( nee Pss of Hesse/Kassel) treat her well or did they have the same disdain as their daughters had?

I think she was quite close to Thyra .

[Furienna]

Originally Posted by theresa_225

Because she was a fast eater, her nephews and nieces called her "Aunt Hallelujah." Not very nice I suppose...

Can someone explain to me why they would call her that because she was a fast eater? It doesn't make sense.

[SLV]

Family jokes are rarily understood by outsiders. So, no idea.

[Meraude]

Originally Posted by Furienna

She could have become queen of Sweden, since she was the daughter of a king, if her uncle Oscar and aunt Sophie hadn't gotten four sons. Because she was a female, her male cousins basically threw her out of the line of succession.

Princess Lovisa of Sweden was never "thrown out" of the line of succession to the Swedish throne by her male cousins, of the simple reason that she never had had a place in it (nor had any other Bernadotte princess before Victoria and Madeleine). Sweden had absolute agnatic (Salic) primogeniture from 1810, when Karl Johan became crown prince of Sweden until 1980, when there was a change in the order of succession to absolute cognatic primogeniture.

[Furienna]

It seems like she's a parallell to Sophie Magdalene, a Danish princess born in 1746, who became the queen of Sweden. She's been described as our unhappiest queen ever. Her marriage to king Gustaf III wasn't all that happy, and her mother-in-law was incredibly mean to her. She was criticised for hanging out too much with Danish people. (Even though Sweden and Denmark are brothers now, we were often at war with each other back in the day, so a queen hanging out with Danish people, even though she too was Danish, was seen as very inappropriate at the time.) And she also lived to see her son, Gustaf IV Adolf, lose the throne and have to leave the country with his family.

[Furienna]

Originally Posted by Meraude

Princess Lovisa of Sweden was never "thrown out" of the line of succession to the Swedish throne by her male cousins, of the simple reason that she never had had a place in it (nor had any other Bernadotte princess before Victoria and Madeleine). Sweden had absolute agnatic (Salic) primogeniture from 1810, when Karl Johan became crown prince of Sweden until 1980, when there was a change in the order of succession to absolute cognatic primogeniture.

Back when I wrote that, I didn't know the details about this. I assumed that a Swedish princess in the 19th century could inherit the throne, if there were no male heirs. We did have two regent queens previously (Christina and Ulrica Eleonora), and Queen Victoria was a girl, but still inherited the British throne. But I find it strange, that the law wasn't changed a bit already a generation before it was. After all, our current king has four older sisters, and it was very uncertain, that there was going to be a boy.

[Meraude]

Originally Posted by Furienna

Back when I wrote that, I didn't know the details about this. I assumed that a Swedish princess in the 19th century could inherit the throne, if there were no male heirs. We did have two regent queens previously (Christina and Ulrica Eleonora), and Queen Victoria was a girl, but still inherited the British throne. But I find it strange, that the law wasn't changed a bit already a generation before it was. After all, our current king has four older sisters, and it was very uncertain, that there was going to be a boy.

Before 1810 Swedish princesses could inherit the throne and also pass the right to the Swedish throne to their children (Karl X Gustav's mother was the sister of Gustav II Adolf), it was not until 1810 females was excluded from the order of succession. England and Scotland never adopted the Salic law of inheritence of the throne, which is why Victoria could become queen.

As for a change in the order of succession in the 1930:ies or 1940:ies, I doubt king Gustaf V would have agreed to that, and do remember that prince Bertil remained unmarried in case something was to happen to Carl Gustav. If he had become the heir I would guess that Bertil would have done his duty and marry a suitable princess and have children.

[Furienna]

I then wonder why the law about this was changed in 1810. I guess we could partly blame the law not being changed again a generation earlier than what it was on Gustaf V, but Gustaf VI Adolf was just as traditional as his father had been, so that was why prince Bertil wasn't allowed to marry Lilian until after he too had died.

[persian85033]

I always wondered how her father in law, Christian IX and her brothers in law treated her? Was he a bit nicer to her than her mother in law and sisters in law were? Or was he just as mean?

Originally Posted by theresa_225

The next king was not fond of Dagmar because of her treatment towards his mother. I do not have the exact source now, so correct me if I'm wrong

I wouldn't blame him if he did. Normally, I like Dagmar, but I do think she went a little too far in how she treated her sister in law. I wonder how she felt after the revolution. Lovisa was still Queen Mother, and her son was still King of Denmark(and alive).

[Furienna]

The next king, who was Louise's son, was Christian X. The first modern king of Norway was also her son.

Thinking of that, I know remember a mini series about Carl (Haakon) and Maud, which also featured then crown princess Louise, played by Susanne Reuter. It wasn't a very nice portraital of Louise. I especially remembered her being very pushy about Carl accepting the Norwegian throne, when he hesitated about it. But at least she seemed to get along well with her husband, crown prince Fredrik.

[CyrilVladisla]

Queen Louise was interested in music and painting and financed many artists. Some of her own paintings were exhibited and given as gifts to members of other dynasties.

[CyrilVladisla]

"Three Royal Widows at Christmas" originally appeared in The Indianapolis Star on December 18, 1922.
http://www.thecourtjeweller.com/2016...widows-at.html
The Widows were: Dowager Queen Louise of Denmark, Dowager Empress Marie Feodorovna of Russia, and Dowager Queen Alexandra of England.

[Prinsara]

According to the comments in the blog, which say according to the Times, Lovisa was not there... Not much of a surprise.

I've wondered lately if all her pregnancies didn't give her some very bad hormonal/emotional issues on top of the negative treatment she got from her in-laws, and perhaps that's why she ended up treating her children so poorly. (Was she as bad to them all straight through, or did the younger ones have it any easier...?)

Trying to fit her various selves together is a bit like doing a jigsaw.

[Prinsara]

Being the fanciest princess in Europe.
https://www.the-eastern-window.com/r.../EWcc2-17.html

I don't know what her money was invested in, but it paid off in a stream of these endlessly elaborate dresses.

[Muhler]

It's an interesting detail that she is showing off her shoe (or what do you call such footwear? Bootlette? In Danish it's a støvle, and a short and neat støvle for women is called a støvlette, hence bootlette.) or was that detail as sexy thing?