New Titles for Queen Margrethe's Descendants: 2008 & 2022 - Page 28

Sister Morphine · #**541** 09-30-2022, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prinsara

Why shouldn't Alexandra protest considering Her Majesty arbitrarily changed the rules and is now treating her sons and their minor siblings a lot worse?

Immensely rich and privileged people being treated slightly less rich and privileged than their immensely rich and privileged cousins is not being treated "a lot worse." Come on now. How are their lives going to irreparably change as a result of this? Will they be living in a hovel? Eating cat food? Selling blood to pay the bills? Going from Prince/Princess to Count/Countess is hardly the apocalyptic scenario that some of y'all are making it out to be.

Alisa · #**542** 09-30-2022, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prinsara

Why shouldn't Alexandra protest considering Her Majesty arbitrarily changed the rules and is now treating her sons and their minor siblings a lot worse?

Treating them "alot worse"? All the Queen did was take their titles away and let it be known that they will be now known as Count/-ess Montpezat. She doesn't love them any less. She never denounced them or publicly ostracized them.

I am baffled that so many (Joachim and company included) seems to equate

Prince/Princess of Denmark= love and admiration from the Queen

Count/Countess of Montpezat= hate and ostracization from the Queen.

ppetrica · #**543** 09-30-2022, 10:17 AM

Many people say that Joachim's children have so far done nothing wrong as they are just children/jung adults, so why are they being punished?
Exactly!
So far they haven't done anything wrong, but it's just the matter of time, because after all they are just humans and every human makes mistakes, it's perfectly normal.

But reaction of the media (and big part of the public) to situations like this when they happen isn't normal!
Times have changed drastically and royals are under the microscope 24/7. Every move they make is being watched and criticized. Damn if they do, damn if they don't.
But when "lesser" royals do mistake, the criticism, judgement and scrutiny they are then exposed to is not as harsh as when it's about a "senior" royal with higher rank and title.

So, removing princely title and highness status from Joachim's children now, not in the future, is a good move for both themselves long term and the monarchy.
They are not expelled from the royal family, they are always going to be members of the royal family as they are keeping their places in line of succession. They are always going to be included in all family events. Doors of all family residences will always be open to them. It's not like they've been kicked out in the street and that nobody in the family wants to see or talk to them ever again! And they aren't going to be without any titles: instead of HH prince/princess they are going to be HE count/countess.

Look at the late princess Elisabeth, she had to choose between keeping titles/status or getting married. The Queen doesn't want her grandchildren to ever have to make a similar decision where they cannot choose the path that makes them happy just because it isn't appropriate from the monarchy point of view.

Whether the Queen asked Joachim to talk to his family herself in person (but he or they refused), or she asked Joachim that he talks to his family instead of her, or Joachim himself asked that he will be the one to talk to his family and then tell her their mutual opinion - well, we'll probably never know.
All 3 options are possible.
I personally think that in lack of convincing arguments Joachim and his family decided to delay talking about it with the Queen for as long as possible and hope she would change her mind in time.
Then when the Queen gave them 5 days, they probably thought that she won't go through with it.
And when she did, they were left really shocked as they didn't expect it, so they decided to go to the media in search for sympathy, hoping that the media and the public will force the Queen to give up.

Two mistakes happened here:
1. The Queen should have insisted on first talking it thoroughly with the entire family instead of revealing her intentions to Joachim only and then letting him and his family drag it on and on, and then she should have waited for a bit until the initial shock and resentment calm down and only afterwards go public about it.
2. Joachim and his family obviously enjoy having royal titles and status and all the perks that go with it, but they should have more understanding for the Queen. She is a head of state and they should understand that sometimes (many times) she has to put the state first and that in long term, it will be better for them also if and when they find themselves in a situation that the public and the media won't approve. The public trial will be less harsh on them. So they should have had intensive talks all together with the Queen and not solving the problem via the media.

It sounds as if I don't like him or his family generally, but in fact the Schackenborgs have always been my favorites amongst the Danish royals (especially Marie

, I've been her biggest fan since day 1), just as I've always liked counts Christian and Ingolf and their sister Elisabeth. So I admit that I am quite disappointed with how this situation evolved.

I am certain that Carl Philip and Madeleine felt very very hurt and didn't like the King's decision at all about their children's status, but they obviously understand King's perspective as they acted incredibly mature and dignified.
Something Joachim and his family should have followed.

The best thing to do now is for us all to stop judging them all and let them solve it privately.

Catharina · #**544** 09-30-2022, 10:24 AM

What I'm wondering is the difference between families. King Carl Gustaf only removed the HRH, not the princely titles or dukedoms. Why couldn't Queen Margrethe simply remove the HH, why take away everything? I mean, why give them in the first place to snatch them away whenever she feels like it? And now Crown Princess Mary insinuating some of her children might lose their titles in the future. Why don't we just revert to having only the regent and the first in line with titles and see how long it takes before people start asking why should even they have any titles at all.

Tatiana Maria · #**545** 09-30-2022, 10:24 AM

With all due respect, the argument that the press release ought to have explicitly stated that the same changes would apply to the children of Vincent / the children of Isabella, Vincent and Josephine seems to fly in the face of other arguments which have been made on this board:

1) In discussions about British royal titles that took place before the death of Queen Elizabeth II, many argued that it would be meaningless, inappropriate and/or disrespectful to Elizabeth to publish various announcements about plans for titles during Charles' reign while she was still alive. It is likely that the grandchildren of Crown Prince Frederik will not be born until the future reign of Frederik X, so by the same logic, would it not also be inappropriate to make announcements about their titles during the reign of Queen Margrethe II?

2) In the past, many posters who asked questions about, say, how future husbands of various young princesses might be titled have been accused of assuming that those princesses will have husbands. Again, by the same logic, wouldn't an announcement about the future titles of Vincent et al's children be unfairly assuming that they will have children?

While I do not personally agree with these arguments, it is surprising that they have not been raised here after being repeatedly brought up in a number of previous discussions.

**Somebody** · #**546** 09-30-2022, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blog Real

Princess Benedikte was also asked about the loss of titles for Prince Joachim's children:
"I think of course it's difficult for them at first, that's pretty clear, but my sister makes wise decisions, also as a queen and thinks about the future and not here and now, and I think that's the most important thing."

https://www.bt.dk/royale/nu-reagerer...-royale-titler

Indeed. Well said (better than her sister so far): acknowledging that it is difficult for them but also emphasizing that the decision was made with the future in mind (so no personal affront).

Some people also expressed that the statement should have included a sentence about them remaining much loved members of the family or something along those lines. Imho that would only be necessary if the contrary should be assumed based on what is communicated. However, that's not the case. Just like years ago it wasn't needed to communicate that Isabella, Vincent and Josephine remain much loved members of the family - but will not receive a dotation. There is no relationship between these decisions, so adding such a statement would only suggest that this could have been done out of spite instead of being a rational decision about the future of the royal house that has no relationship to any feelings whatsoever.

Blog Real · #**547** 09-30-2022, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catharina

What I'm wondering is the difference between families. King Carl Gustaf only removed the HRH, not the princely titles or dukedoms. Why couldn't Queen Margrethe simply remove the HH, why take away everything? I mean, why give them in the first place to snatch them away whenever she feels like it? And now Crown Princess Mary insinuating some of her children might lose their titles in the future. Why don't we just revert to having only the regent and the first in line with titles and see how long it takes before people start asking why should even they have any titles at all.

I do not believe that Isabella, Vincent and Josephine will lose their titles.
The Royal House also cannot go around giving and taking titles to its members. This would give the Royal House of Denmark a bad image.

Tatiana Maria · #**548** 09-30-2022, 10:56 AM

For comparison, the announcements of title removals or limitations in the other Scandinavian monarchies also did not mention future generations going forward.

Nor did they mention anything along the lines of the family members still being much loved.

Read them at these links:

Sweden: Announcement of Prince Carl Philip's and Princess Madeleine's children's removal from the Royal House (2019)

His Majesty The King has decided on changes to The Royal House. The purpose of these changes is to establish which members of The Royal Family may be expected to perform official duties incumbent on the Head of State or related to the function of the Head of State.

His Majesty The King has decided that the children of Their Royal Highnesses Prince Carl Philip and Princess Sofia, and the children of Her Royal Highness Princess Madeleine and Mr Christopher O’Neill will no longer be members of The Royal House.

Prince Alexander, Prince Gabriel, Princess Leonore, Prince Nicolas and Princess Adrienne will continue to be members of The Royal Family. However, they will no longer enjoy the style of Royal Highness and, in the future, will not be expected to perform duties incumbent on the Head of State.

[...]

Norway: Announcement that Prince Sverre Magnus will not be a Royal Highness (2005)

His Majesty The King has decided that Prince Sverre Magnus is not to be titled His Royal Highness. The Prince's birthday will not become an official flag-flying day, and there will be no salute from the Military installations on forthcoming birthdays.

His Majesty The King's decision involves no constitutional changes. Prince Sverre Magnus enters the line of succession to the Throne after Her Royal Highness Princess Ingrid Alexandra.

Norway: Announcement that Princess Märtha Louise of Norway will start working (and thereby lose her Royal Highness) (2002) (unofficial translation of Norwegian royal expert Dag T. Hoelseth, lightly edited by me)

[...]

The Princess' decision to enter working life creates a greater distance to the Royal House's constitutional role. His Majesty The King has therefore after having consulted the Princess decided that she from 1 February 2002 no longer is to be styled her Royal Highness, but Princess Märtha Louise. This change will have no consequence concerning the Princess' place in the line of succession. She remains number 2 in the line of succession until the Crown Prince couple possibly get children.

The Princess' engagements on behalf of the Royal House will be reduced compared to the level of today. The Princess will continue to make some engagements on behalf of the Royal House. The Princess is meant to follow up her own protectorates, but will to a less degree take on new ones. His Majesty The King will cover all expenses connected to representation.

Minister of Court · #**549** 09-30-2022, 11:15 AM

I have never cared for the Joachim branch of the family, not one of them. Their behaviour in recent days just confirms that the Queen’s decision was absolutely right.

Kataryn · #**550** 09-30-2022, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catharina

And as for the Count of Monpezat title, it's really not a title anyone takes seriously. Sounds like the numerous Counts of Sealand running around.

You mentioned aspects of why I fear for the monarchies, too. Already the Daily Fail in the UK uses Denmark's example as a means to push Charles III. into stripping Harry and Meghan of their titles and styles completely.

Why can't the queen of Denmark have 8 grandchildren all with a "prince/ess of Denmark"-title which will dissolve later? And next generation it's Fred's grandchildren. IMHO a monarch should stick to titles once given. Not necessary to Royal styles like HRH, but to the meaning of them. Especially if there is no surname like Bernadotte, Nassau-Oranje or Mountbatten-Windsor, just territirial designation for the ruling family. Or demote her grandchildren to count/ess of Denmark if the title of "prince/ess" appears to be to "high". They are the grandchildren of the monarch in the male-line after all. Or create a secondary , lower Royal title for the cadet branches, like Count/ess of Zealand.

Love the Count of Sealand-idea, though the UK has a real "Marquess of Zetland" in its peerage (after the former spelling of the Shetland-isles) and as you can see it's not so far from Z-land to C-land...

Izzie · #**551** 09-30-2022, 12:25 PM

Amber Fall · #**552** 09-30-2022, 12:51 PM

I have seen a lot of people saying that Joachim and his family should have taken the news like Madeleine and Carl Philip did as an example to follow but there's a key difference in the two situations. Madeleine and Carl Philip were apart of the process and were consulted throughout the decision in the discussions around what will happen to their children's titles.

This was not the case with Joachim where there seem to be a major lapse in communication between the queen and her son. Not giving meaningful consultation with your son on a matter that will affect his children is a mark of disrespect and inconsideration to your son and his family. If Joachim was stalling, then the queen should have sat him down and forced a conversation in how the title will be rescinded and included his adult grandchildren. If Joachim didn't want the queen to tell them, then the queen needed to privately and individually initiated contact with the two elder princes as adults conversing about their futures. It does not matter that if you are not a "fuzzy" grandmother, it is your responsibility as the head of your family to consult with everyone in a matter that directly affects them. No matter what situation, telling your family through an intermediary that their titles will change, in this way which was different then what they thought it would be, only 5-6 days before the public message is published and leaving no room for consultation is disrespectful and hurtful to the directly effected.

Furthermore, not consulting with your adult grandsons about a matter that will have everlasting affects on their lives is not only disrespectful to her grandsons but shows a lack of regard for their agency and ability to be consulted with. Respect can not be expected just because you're a mother, grandmother, or even queen. To obtain respect, it must be shown in return. To expect understanding, you must consult and explain your reasoning directly to those effected. Accountability is important for anyone no matter position and rank. Joachim and his family will certainly face accountability and consequences for their public remarks but the queen must also face accountability in the way she handled the situation. Letting a courtier inform his son about her final decision reeks of escaping accountability for her actions. I understand why Joachim and his family refuse to let this matter sweep under the rug if they were not consulted manfully throughout the process because that is a breech of trust and respect that they cannot let slide. Even if it will bite them in the future.

Toledo · #**553** 09-30-2022, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kataryn

...People held in high regard by the monarch normally gain titles or orders, they don't lose them. That's the way humans think and no grandmother's love will change that perception. And even that is missing. While in the Swedish case the whole family stood there and agreed with the king and the Crown Princess and the (small) devotement went down well. In Belgium a Court of law decided that even an illegitimate daughter born to the king shares his Royal blood and thus should be known as a princess of Belgium...

Same happened in Spain when two persons associated with Juan Carlos' affairs found their way to match their DNA as siblings, and before that Juan Carlos' Tio Leandro won his case in court to bear the Borbon surname in 2003 and finally recognized at age 74 as son of King Alfonso XIII.

Back to the thread, the countdown to January 2023 started. Hope the Royal Forums members that can read Dane or are located in the area keep us updated, as the story moves along, if there are public reactions in favor or against the popular young members of the oldest reigning dynasty in Europe.

I had to say that we are in an age where DNA search has allowed us to see a glimpse of our past and where did we really belong in history. And these two Princes are now watching the calendar to be told where they don't belong anymore.

Duc_et_Pair · #**554** 09-30-2022, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catharina

I am in the minority here but I don't like the downsizing. What's the point? If we're not talking about public money being handed out, why should those born with a title lose it at some specific point, unless they commit serious crime or act in a way that puts the title into shame? I don't like the new idea of having titles that are valid for a few years only. Why would there be any need for monarchy at all if these titles are temporary? The whole point of monarchy is continuance and people being able to devote their whole lives to the duty of representing the title, whether it is by being a full time working member of a royal house or simply representing the title given to them otherwise. It's tricky I know, the demands for royals to be more like ordinary people but at the same time it is stripping the whole thing of the essence of it. I am from a republic but I do not want to see monarchies gone. There's various negative consequences from it which people cannot see most of the time. All systems have negatives and positives but I don't see why symbolic titles have to be taken. If Margrethe thinks titles do not matter, she should try giving up hers and then try to get a table at that fancy restaurant being a regular Mrs Monpezat. And as for the Count of Monpezat title, it's really not a title anyone takes seriously. Sounds like the numerous Counts of Sealand running around.

The aim is to limit - to keep the institution workable and sustainable for the future. When these grandchildren of Margrethe, these nephews and nieces of Frederik, these cousins and cousines of Christian will never have a role in the Royal House, it is unlogic that they walk around with titles of said Royal House for maybe 80 years to go.

It is a very simple and wise assessment and was long overdue. Undoubtedly also Belgium and Luxembourg will follow soon.

Duke of Marmalade · #**555** 09-30-2022, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muhler

Mary has given a statement:

https://www.bt.dk/royale/kronprinses...-boerns-titler

Video included.

A very quick translation of the quotes in the text:
"Change can be immeasurably difficult and it can be really painful. I think most have tried that/been through that.

But that doesn't mean that the decision isn't the right one. We will also have to look at the title of our children, when it's time for that."

Q: Does that also mean that Your (formal) children can also lose the titles of prince and princesses?

"We cannot see today how the DRF will look like when it's Christian's time or when Christian's time is approaching."

- Hmm.
No surprise that she comes out in a defense of the decision. Anything less would be an earthquake.
The last sentence is interesting. Is there a deeper meaning? In other words: Is Frederik's time approaching? Soon.

Thanks for the translation, Muhler!
What I find almost funny is that - if at all - somebody has to speak out, it should not be the wives/ex-wives but the brothers themselves.
Today Mary, a couple of days ago Alexandra, a while ago Marie, when complaining about the Paris move ...
If Frederik is still sailing somewhere in France, the situation can't be that bad.

polyesco · #**556** 09-30-2022, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blog Real

I do not believe that Isabella, Vincent and Josephine will lose their titles.
The Royal House also cannot go around giving and taking titles to its members. This would give the Royal House of Denmark a bad image.

I agree. And Isabella, Vincent and Josephine should not lose their titles. They will be in due time the Benedikte and Joachim of Frederik and Chrisitian reigns.

I think of lot of this drama was the result of Alexandra's, with Joachim and Marie's okay, very quick response. 3 minutes after the announcement was too soon.

This has been discussed since at least May, if the Queen failed to talk to her grandsons is one thing, but Joachim should have since May. A delay in his part push this further then need be.

Mary and Benedikte did great jobs being polite and answering. Acknowledging that this is hard for both sides, but the Queen sometimes has to make difficult decisions. Even if they disagree they deal with that privately.

And lets not forget, Joachim's kids still have titles, just Counts instead of Princes. Nothing else changed for them.

Izzie · #**557** 09-30-2022, 01:37 PM

Why does QMII get a pass on any responsibility here? So she is the head of the family to MAKE the decision arbitrarily BUT she is NOT when it comes to having accountability for the shoddy handling, fallout, consequences, collateral damage and hurt feelings? Seriously?

I felt for Mary. She obviously looked uncomfortable. She was very discreet in towing that "company line". Very awkward position she was put it. And Frederik hasn't had microphones stuck in his face yet. He has been put in an even worse position.

But I guess when you have a buffer in other having to be the ones dealing with media questions there's that echo chamber and disconnect.

akina21 · #**558** 09-30-2022, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polyesco

I agree. And Isabella, Vincent and Josephine should not lose their titles. They will be in due time the Benedikte and Joachim of Frederik and Chrisitian reigns.

I think of lot of this drama was the result of Alexandra's, with Joachim and Marie's okay, very quick response. 3 minutes after the announcement was too soon.

This has been discussed since at least May, if the Queen failed to talk to her grandsons is one thing, but Joachim should have since May. A delay in his part push this further then need be.

Mary and Benedikte did great jobs being polite and answering. Acknowledging that this is hard for both sides, but the Queen sometimes has to make difficult decisions. Even if they disagree they deal with that privately.

And lets not forget, Joachim's kids still have titles, just Counts instead of Princes. Nothing else changed for them.

Except for their name .

Moonmaiden23 · #**559** 09-30-2022, 01:48 PM

Curious. Will members of the defunct Greek Royal House who bear the designation of "Prince/Princess of Denmark" lose their Danish titles as well?

Or will Maria-Olympia and her brothers continue to claim Danish Royal titles and pass them down in perpetuity?

tommy100 · #**560** 09-30-2022, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alisa

Treating them "alot worse"? All the Queen did was take their titles away and let it be known that they will be now known as Count/-ess Montpezat. She doesn't love them any less. She never denounced them or publicly ostracized them.

I am baffled that so many (Joachim and company included) seems to equate

Prince/Princess of Denmark= love and admiration from the Queen

Count/Countess of Montpezat= hate and ostracization from the Queen.

I agree with this, taking the titles doesn't mean she doesn't love them still and they won't be part of the family. I think why people may feel they are 'hated and being ostracised' by the Queen is the way it was done - not in person but by staff, without full agreement and discussion and without any mention of that important fact that they "remain my much loved grandchildren" or something similar.I now others have pointed out the other Scandinavian RF's didn't mention this in their statements at the time but they also had full agreement of the members / parents of those it involved, the Royal Court of Sweden for example clearly set up the fact Madeline and CP would issue statement after the news expressing their contentment with the change. Knowing Joachim wasn't happy they should have made a bigger point that this was merely a "technical" decision not one that in any way affects a family's strong bond. The problem is, in Denmark there have been mutterings for a while of Joachim and family being sent away to Paris etc so its easy to see this as more personal.

Mary as someone who holds her title by marriage and whose own children are "the contrast" to Joachim's shouldn't have commented at all IMO, it is too easy to take the wrong way and add fuel to the fire. The Queen should have commented or Frederick not any one else as far as I see.

Having thought about it I think the Queen knew that this would / was more likely to happen under Fred's reign and felt that would look really bad and lead to speculation that brothers were at war so took the decision herself hoping it would play better coming from "a mother". Problem is Daisy isn't the most maternal of mothers, it has quite possibly been even worse a reaction than leaving it to Fred to sort.