Titles, Surname and Nationality of the Greek Royal Family, Part 2, 2024 -

[Tatiana Maria]

Would there be any practical difference? If it is not recognized by the state you are a citizen of, there seems to be no practical difference between between being a citizen or not because they were treated by the state as if they weren't citizens (until they would comply).

One practical difference is that because the family members technically have had Greek citizenship all along, they did not need to fulfill the conditions for acquiring Greek citizenship. A foreigner seeking to acquire Greek citizenship through naturalization would need to reside in Greece for a certain amount of time, for example. But because the family members were technically already Greek citizens (even Pavlos' children, who have never lived in Greece) and simply applying to have their existing Greek citizenship recognized, they did not need to undergo the same processes as non-citizens seeking to acquire Greek citizenship.

It also answers the question of why spouses were not included in the published decision: The spouses cannot ask to be recognized as Greek citizens because (other than Chrysi) they do not already have existing Greek citizenship. (Since 1984 a foreign woman can no longer become a Greek citizen simply by marrying a Greek man.)

But I agree with your point that the personal experience of being undocumented citizens who were treated like non-citizens was probably not much different than what they would have experienced if they had been non-citizens.

It is not true:

What is not true? What you have written seems consistent with what is written above.

 

[Somebody]

It seems a gray area; imho there citizenship was in (involuntary) abeyance. So, it could be reinstated but was in suspension for the time being.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

It seems a gray area; imho there citizenship was in (involuntary) abeyance. So, it could be reinstated but was in suspension for the time being.

The way I would put it is that the state recognition, passports and other documents, legal rights, treatment, etc. associated with Greek citizenship were all in suspension/abeyance, while the underlying citizenship remained continuous.


On a related note, in regards to that Article 6 of the 1994 law:

[...] This is a translation of what the law of 1994 actually says in regards to the family’s citizenship:

Article 6.

5. Greek citizenship to Constantine Glyxburg and members of his family, after the expiry of the special legal status which governed their citizenship before the change in the form of the constitution, shall be recognized and proved only if the following conditions are cumulatively met:

a) If an express and unconditional declaration of respect for the Constitution, acceptance and recognition of the constitution of the Presidential Parliamentary Republic and of the result of the referendum of 8 December 1974, which determined the form of the constitution in an unalterable manner, is made before the Athens registrar.

(b) If a waiver of all claims of any kind in connection with the past exercise of a political office or the holding of any title is expressly and unconditionally declared before the same registrar.

(c) If an entry has been made in the registers of men or in the municipal or communal public registers of the State with the name, surname, and other legally required identification data.

A decision of the Minister of the Interior establishes that the above conditions have been met. Passports, travel, and other relevant documents issued to such persons shall be automatically cancelled if the above conditions are not met.”

Pavlos and Nikolaos: proceed with the application for Greek citizenship - The three requirements - ProtoThema English

Crucial element is the surname they choose - "I have a surname. Of Greece. Why should I change it?" said Paul recently

en.protothema.gr

[...]
​

I wonder which persons exactly are meant by "members of his family" and therefore subject to the requirements of this law. The mention of "after the expiry of the special legal status which governed their citizenship before the change in the form of the constitution" suggests the members of the family who held a special legal status while Greece was a monarchy, but since family members born after the end of the monarchy have also been deemed to be subject to this law (Pavlos' children, Theodora and Philippos), it is clearly interpreted more broadly than that.

 

[Lipe]

The suspension of nationality does not exist in law, this formula is impossible to maintain. Why? Because the principle of nationality is:
Every person must have a passport and a nationality.
A person without a nationality is a stateless person. They cannot move, they cannot enter any country... therefore, international treaties prohibit this and oblige the states where these persons are located to issue them a passport.

There are two nationalities that cannot be revoked unless the person renounces it or voluntarily acquires another. "Ius sanguinis", which is the nationality you receive from your parents when you are born( the nationality your parents), and ius solis, from the territory where you were born.

The fact that gives the right to this nationality, jus sangunis and jus solis, cannot be revoked or withdrawn. You can voluntarily acquire another nationality, and you will lose your pasport originaly, but the fact that legitimized it—being the child of parents with a passport from a certain country or you was born in this territory—will always be taken into account in case of potential problems with the passports.that you have subsequently acquired or even to receive the passport from the country of origin again.

Greece violated its own Constitution, which prohibits statelessness, and international treaties. In fact, many of the immigrants who have arrived in Greece in recent years due to conflicts in their countries have declared themselves stateless so that the Greek State would grant them nationality.

That the greek State decided to make a law specifically aimed at people whose passports its has revoked, violating its own constitution and the European Union Treaties, is an excuse to divert attention and attempt to legitimize its decision.

Regarding the consorts of the Greek Royal Family, they are affected by this law.

And finally, the proof that this is not a passport suspension lies in Michel of Greece. He complied with the 1994 law, in 2004, and he received a passport dated 1974. He had a greek "sui sangunis" passport from his father, which he never recovered, and he was not even considered for citizenship. This was not a suspension, it was a revocation of citizenship.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Your post appears to argue that the law of 1994 (which meant to suspend the passports, but not revoke the citizenship) still violated the Constitution (which prohibits revocation of citizenship, except in specific circumstances which do not apply to this family) because refusing the family Greek passports (until they complied) was equivalent to making them stateless.

It is a reasonable argument to make (though not everyone will agree: when ex-king Constantine sued in the European Court of Human Rights, the Court’s opinion was that there was no legal problem with the 1994 law's passport requirements). However, that argument is beyond the scope of my earlier post, which was about more basic issues.

My post was intended for readers who (unlike you) have never read the 1994 law, are not well informed about the 1994 law, and only know what is written in headlines, forum posts and social media posts. Those readers could easily get the false impression that the 1994 law said something like "XYZ are no longer citizens of Greece", which it did not say. That is the misconception I wished to correct.

Regarding your other comments:

I do not perceive how the law affects consorts who married after 1984 and thus are not entitled to Greek citizenship by marriage.

If Michel De Grèce being issued a passport in 2004 which was dated 1974 is true (I would appreciate a source; I am quite curious about what happened in 2004), and the law of 1994 was applied to him, then it seems to me that the law was indeed applied correctly as suspending his passport, not revoking his citizenship: If it were interpreted as revoking his citizenship, I’d expect the passport to be dated 2004.

However, even if (as you suggest) the law was interpreted and enforced in an unconstitutional manner, that does not change what the law itself says.

The announcement of December 23, 2024 from the family’s private office stated: “The law of 1994 deprived us of our citizenship, rendering us stateless […]”.

However, that is not exactly correct. The members of Konstantinos’ family were never technically deprived of their Greek citizenship and so technically were never stateless.

The law of 1994 suspended the recognition of their citizenship (their municipal registration, their passports, their right to vote, etc.) until they fulfilled the requirements that were mandated in the law.


The law of 1994 did not and could not truly deprive them of their citizenship, because withdrawing their citizenship was forbidden by the Constitution of 1975 (which remains in force until now). Then and now, the Constitution states:

Article 4. […] 3. All persons possessing the qualifications for citizenship as specified by law are Greek citizens. Withdrawal of Greek citizenship shall be permitted only in case of voluntary acquisition of another citizenship or of undertaking service contrary to national interests in a foreign country, under the conditions and procedures more specifically provided by law.​

So long as the family members did not voluntarily acquire foreign citizenship and did not undertake service contrary to Greek national interests, the Constitution simply did not permit the Government to withdraw their citizenship.


This is a translation of what the law of 1994 actually says in regards to the family’s citizenship:

Article 6.

5. Greek citizenship to Constantine Glyxburg and members of his family, after the expiry of the special legal status which governed their citizenship before the change in the form of the constitution, shall be recognized and proved only if the following conditions are cumulatively met:

a) If an express and unconditional declaration of respect for the Constitution, acceptance and recognition of the constitution of the Presidential Parliamentary Republic and of the result of the referendum of 8 December 1974, which determined the form of the constitution in an unalterable manner, is made before the Athens registrar.

(b) If a waiver of all claims of any kind in connection with the past exercise of a political office or the holding of any title is expressly and unconditionally declared before the same registrar.

(c) If an entry has been made in the registers of men or in the municipal or communal public registers of the State with the name, surname, and other legally required identification data.

A decision of the Minister of the Interior establishes that the above conditions have been met. Passports, travel, and other relevant documents issued to such persons shall be automatically cancelled if the above conditions are not met.”

Pavlos and Nikolaos: proceed with the application for Greek citizenship - The three requirements - ProtoThema English

Crucial element is the surname they choose - "I have a surname. Of Greece. Why should I change it?" said Paul recently

en.protothema.gr

So the effect of the 1994 law was that the family’s citizenship was no longer “recognized and proved”, meaning that their citizenship documents (including passports) were canceled and could not be renewed until they complied with the conditions (declaration, waiver, registration). But in principle, the citizenship itself was never lost.

 

[Somebody]

Lipe, I am not sure what you are trying to communicate about ius solis and ius sanguinis. Are you suggesting that all countries apply both principles (which isn't true) or that Greece applies both principles?

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I will add that not all countries apply the principle that nationality equals passport (for example, the Danish Government issued ex-king Konstantin a Danish diplomatic passport but did not grant him Danish nationality), and not all countries apply the principle that statelessness and/or passportlessness must be prevented at all costs.

Anne-Marie surrendered her Danish nationality upon her marriage. I expect Greeks in 1964 wouldn't have accepted their queen retaining foreign nationality.

Could you direct me to your source for this? It is difficult to find information on the marriage arrangements.


Interestingly, this news report from December 19, 2024 quotes an anonymous government official who says it would be legal for the family to choose any surname they wanted – even “Vasilias” (King) or “Prinkipas” (Prince). I wonder if Nikolaos talked his siblings out of that option.

 

[Biri]

Is Prince Nikolaos' wife already tilted "Princess Chrysi" ?

 

[blooms_rulers]

Could you direct me to your source for this? It is difficult to find information on the marriage arrangements.

Danish nationality law didn't allow dual nationality until the 21st century, so even if she hadn't renounced it like she renounced her right of succession for herself and her descendants, it was automatically lost when she acquired Greek nationality, which, according to the Greeks, she did have until 1994 (or whatever the Government claims they did or didn't do in 1994).

The law has since changed but this was decades after her marriage. However, there was a provision to regain Danish nationality for a period (if such arrangements hadn't been made in 1994).

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Danish nationality law didn't allow dual nationality until the 21st century, so even if she hadn't renounced it like she renounced her right of succession for herself and her descendants, it was automatically lost when she acquired Greek nationality

Danish nationality was only automatically lost if one actively applied for or consented to acquire a different nationality. (See § 7 paragraph 1 of the Danish citizenship law of 1950, which was the governing law at the time of Anne-Marie's marriage.)

Anne-Marie automatically became a Greek national upon marriage without needing to apply for or consent to it. Until 1984, a non-Greek woman who married a Greek man automatically acquired Greek nationality on marriage, unless she preemptively declared her refusal. (See the summary in section 2.4 of this report).

Thus, Anne-Marie did not automatically lose her Danish nationality when she automatically became a Greek national by marriage in 1964. But the Danish law did permit voluntary renunciations of Danish nationality (see § 9 of the Danish law of 1950), and I would be interested to know whether she did so.

 

[blooms_rulers]

Danish nationality was only automatically lost if one actively applied for or consented to acquire a different nationality. (See § 7 paragraph 1 of the Danish citizenship law of 1950, which was the governing law at the time of Anne-Marie's marriage.)

Anne-Marie automatically became a Greek national upon marriage without needing to apply for or consent to it. Until 1984, a non-Greek woman who married a Greek man automatically acquired Greek nationality on marriage, unless she preemptively declared her refusal. (See the summary in section 2.4 of this report).

Thus, Anne-Marie did not automatically lose her Danish nationality when she automatically became a Greek national by marriage in 1964. But the Danish law did permit voluntary renunciations of Danish nationality (see § 9 of the Danish law of 1950), and I would be interested to know whether she did so.

That doesn't make any sense. If Danish law did not permit a Danish national to have Danish nationality and a second nationality, and a person obtains a second nationality, which Anne-Marie did, then she lost her Danish nationality because Denmark didn't allow her to continue it.

She was a Greek national, at least up until 1994, even the Greek government acknowledges that all members of the Greek Royal House were Greek nationals, then her Danish nationality would have been lost because she would have otherwise had dual nationality, which Denmark didn't permit until 2014.

Section 7 paragraph 2 of the Danish law of 1950 said Danish nationality is lost by acquiring foreign citizenship by public service in another country. She was Queen of the Hellenes. Most people would define that as public service in another country. Is your belief that because she didn't have a constitutional role, that she didn't meet that standard?

 

[Tatiana Maria]

That doesn't make any sense.

What doesn't make any sense?

If Danish law did not permit a Danish national to have Danish nationality and a second nationality, and a person obtains a second nationality, which Anne-Marie did, then she lost her Danish nationality because Denmark didn't allow her to continue it.

But the Danish law (as of 1964) did not say "a Danish national is never permitted to have a second nationality". What it actually said was (I cited paragraph 1 but will also quote paragraph 2 since you cite it later in your post):

§ 7
Dansk indfødsret fortabes af

1. den, som erhverver fremmed statsborgerret efter ansøgning eller udtrykkeligt samtykke,

2. den, som erhverver fremmed statsborgerret ved at indtræde i offentlig tjeneste i et andet land,
​

Translation:

§ 7
Danish nationality is forfeited by:

1. one who acquires foreign citizenship by application or explicit consent,

2. one who acquires foreign citizenship by entering into official service in another country,
​

LOV nr 252 af 27/05/1950, Udlændinge- og Integrationsministeriet

Lov om dansk indfødsret. (Indfødsretsloven)

www.retsinformation.dk

Anne-Marie acquired her Greek citizenship automatically, by marrying a Greek man under the Greek law of the time (source).

She did not acquire her Greek citizenship by filing an application to become a Greek citizen, and she did not acquire her Greek citizenship by explicitly making a statement of consent to becoming a Greek citizen. Thus, § 7 paragraph 1 does not apply to her.

You make an interesting argument about § 7 paragraph 2. Such laws were/are common in the citizenship regimes of many countries, and “official service” and similar phrases are typically interpreted as serving in a foreign government or military. I have never heard of it being applied to marrying into a foreign royal family, but if you have heard of such interpretations, I would be interested in that information.

 

[Lipe]

Automatic acquisition of nationality does not exist. Queen Anna Maria acquired nationality through a government decision, which granted her nationality through a decree, taking into consideration that she would be the wife of the Head of State and would represent Greece. In Spain, it's called "Letter of Naturalization," and governments grant it in exceptional cases.

This also exists in Greece. The Greek government has used this process to grant nationality to athletes, coaches, famous foreign actors... who did not meet the residency requirements, etc.

Queen Anne Marie lost her Danish nationality, ( ius sanguinis, her parents were Danish when she was born and ius solis , she was born on Danish soil), and acquired Greek nationality. It is true that jus sanguinis and jus solis nationality—that is, the one you have at birth, your first nationality—is lost. However, this does not prevent that the fact that your parents were Danish and she was born on Danish soil from being taken into consideration, making the acquisition process simpler and easier.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Automatic acquisition of nationality does not exist. Queen Anna Maria acquired nationality through a government decision, which granted her nationality through a decree, taking into consideration that she would be the wife of the Head of State and would represent Greece.

Can you refer to a source for this, please? The aforementioned summary of the history of Greek nationality law states the opposite: that before the reform of 1984, Greek nationality was automatic for women marrying Greek men, unless the woman made a preemptive declaration of refusal.

The most important modification of Greek citizenship law to date occurred in 1984 by virtue of the Law 1438 ‘an amendment of the provisions of the Code of the Greek Nationality and of the law on birth certificates’. [...]

The main amendments worth mentioning are the following: [...]

– The establishment of the principle of independency or individuality of citizenship; until that time the existing principle was one of acquisition of citizenship by marriage. Greek law proceeded with a radical reform, in line with which ‘marriage does not entail the acquisition or loss of Greek citizenship. This provision abolished the previous ones, according to which a Greek woman who was married to a foreign man would lose Greek citizenship, unless she declared in advance her intention to the contrary; conversely a foreign woman who was married to a Greek man would automatically acquire the Greek citizenship, unless she had previously declared that she had no such intent.​

https://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/19615/RSCAS_EUDO_CIT_2013_10.pdf

As for Anne-Marie's Danish nationality, I refer to the legislation linked in my previous post.

 

[Somebody]

(...)
Queen Anne Marie lost her Danish nationality, ( ius sanguinis, her parents were Danish when she was born and ius solis , she was born on Danish soil), and acquired Greek nationality. It is true that jus sanguinis and jus solis nationality—that is, the one you have at birth, your first nationality—is lost. However, this does not prevent that the fact that your parents were Danish and she was born on Danish soil from being taken into consideration, making the acquisition process simpler and easier.

You again seem to suggest that (all) countries apply both ius sanguinis and ius solis. That is not the case. It seems that in many European countries ius sanguinis is applied but they do often do not grant citizenship to everyone born on their soil (ius solis). However, sometimes there are additional requirements for those receiving nationality through their parentage when born abroad - and of course, laws regarding nationality (at birth and after) change over time.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

It is interesting to note the differences between how Pavlos and Nikolaos answered the question “How do you introduce yourself?” in an interview with the Greek television channel ERT in July 2023.

Sofia Papaioannou: If you are in a social gathering, how do you introduce yourself?​

Pavlos: I usually say Pavlos, our surname is Pavlos "of Greece", we were known as such abroad. So it's "Pavlos of Greece" when I'm in the US. Or others say "Prince Pavlos". In a meeting for my job I say "Pavlos of Greece". Look, let me tell you. "Prince Pavlos" is a title but it's not used... how to say this... we don't have any document where I'm written as Prince Pavlos. But I'm a born prince. Greece had monarchy, my kids come from me so they're princes as well. If we are princes under working conditions here in this country, we're not. But it doesn't mean we're not princes because this is something separate from the country, it simply means you're born prince. And that's why our name is the hard part. Because some people call us with other names but when Georg I came from Denmark to become king, he didn't have any other name other than "of Denmark". When he came here, it never crossed his mind that the polity would change and that he would have to take another name. So it was "of Greece".​

Sofia Papaioannou: When crowned democracy came down in Greece, it was the kingship was abolished.​

Pavlos: We're just born like this, it doesn't mean we hold any position and be king.​

​

​

Sofia Papaioannou: Tell me something, how do you introduce yourself? You're at a dinner, in Greece or abroad, how do you introduce yourself, if someone doesn't know you?​

Nikolaos: Nikolaos.​

Sofia Papaioannou: Because, you know, titles have been abolished in Greece, it's hard for someone to say "Prince Nikolaos" or "Prince Pavlos" since these titles are not in existence in Greece.​

Nikolaos: There are people who introduce me like this, people who introduce me as "Mr. Nikolaos". It happens to have this title when I was born. If they use it or don't use it, it's their own matter. I never seek it and always, as I told you earlier, I introduce myself as Nikolaos. Nothing else. I'm not asking: say this, say that. I've never asked anyone to call me "Highness" or "Prince" or anything else. Nikolaos and that's it. And I think there's no reason to talk about such matters. They belong to another era. If someone wants to say it this way and with honour, I won't prohibit it because I don't want to insult that person but it's not something I pursue.​

The translation can be found at this link (I corrected a few minor typos), and the entire interview is an interesting read.

Nikolaos’s answer seems more in tune with the majority public sentiment in Greece, which could be attributed to being the only one of his siblings to live there. It may contribute to why, according to several posters here, his popularity in Greece exceeds that of Pavlos.



There is also an interesting difference between the press releases on the Greek and English versions of the family’s official website: English-language press releases are signed “Private Office of the Greek Royal Family” whereas Greek-language press releases are signed “Γραφείο πρώην Βασιλικής Οικογένειας της Ελλάδος” (“Office of the former Royal Family of Greece”).

Ανακοίνωση 29/1/2025

www.greekroyalfamily.gr

Ανακοίνωση 29/1/2025

www.greekroyalfamily.gr

The guestlist of Princess Isabella to Denmark’s 18th birthday theater performance confirms that Anne-Marie remains a member of the Danish royal family. Since her sister Benedikte’s son and daughter-in-law are also listed as members of the Danish royal family, Anne-Marie’s children and children-in-law are presumably members as well.

Gæsteliste ved fødselsdagsforestilling i Det Kongelige Teater den 15. april 2025

Gæsteliste ved fødselsdagsforestilling i Det Kongelige Teater den 15. april 2025 i anledning af H.K.H. Prinsesse Isabellas 18-års fødselsdag. Den kongelige familieHans Majestæt KongenHend...

www.kongehuset.dk

 

[Tatiana Maria]

The question was raised as to whether wives of Greek princes used their own or their husbands’ forenames. In regards to the Greek royal family, I have only seen Greek texts using wives’ own forenames, never their husbands’.

As an official source, see the birth certificate for Prince Philippos (the future husband of British Queen Elizabeth II) from 1921. His mother Aliki is referred to there as “A. V. Y. Prinkipissas Alikis” (H.R.H. Princess Aliki). She is styled in the same manner in Philippos’ christening invitation.

https://static.independent.co.uk/2021/04/16/17/birthcertificate.jpg
https://static.independent.co.uk/2021/04/16/17/invitation.jpeg

Of course, foreign languages and foreign countries might enforce their own customs, so when she was in Britain, Aliki was referred to as Princess Andrew of Greece, following British custom.

Pavlos De Grèce and his siblings – How Mani “Crowned” him and the battle over the titles "Prince" and "Your Highness" - ProtoThema English

A verbal misstep by the mayor of Eastern Mani has escalated into a high-profile political controversy, just as the children and grandchildren of the former King Constantine prepare to don military uniforms and serve their country

en.protothema.gr

[...] And why Prince instead of Crown Prince, or is that merely a translation issue?

To answer my own question, it is apparently because Pavlos uses the title “Crown Prince” solely in English, never in Greek.

Comparing the Greek and English versions of the family’s official website, whose contents are almost identical, the Greek version consistently uses only “Prinkipas Pavlos” (the equivalent of “Crown Prince” would be “Diadochos”). “Crown Prince” and “HRH” appear only on the English version.

For example, these are the English and Greek versions of the same press release from May 2024:

TRH Crown Prince Pavlos & Crown Princess Marie-Chantal visited the Norman Foster Foundation on 21 & 22/05/2024 in Madrid

Ο Πρίγκιπας Παύλος και η Πριγκίπισσα Marie-Chantal επισκέφθηκαν στις 21 & 22/05/2024, το ίδρυμα Norman Foster στη Μαδρίτη​

 

[Mbruno]

The guestlist of Princess Isabella to Denmark’s 18th birthday theater performance confirms that Anne-Marie remains a member of the Danish royal family. Since her sister Benedikte’s son and daughter-in-law are also listed as members of the Danish royal family, Anne-Marie’s children and children-in-law are presumably members as well.

Gæsteliste ved fødselsdagsforestilling i Det Kongelige Teater den 15. april 2025

Gæsteliste ved fødselsdagsforestilling i Det Kongelige Teater den 15. april 2025 i anledning af H.K.H. Prinsesse Isabellas 18-års fødselsdag. Den kongelige familieHans Majestæt KongenHend...

www.kongehuset.dk

I wonder if the Danes also differentiate between the Royal House (or the official Royal Family) and the extended "Family of the King".

There is no doubt that Queen Anne Marie and her children belong to the King's extended family (they are his aunt and first cousins respectively), but is that the same as saying that they are members of the Danish Royal Family? For instance, they are not even in the line of succession to the Danish throne.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I wonder if the Danes also differentiate between the Royal House (or the official Royal Family) and the extended "Family of the King".

There is no doubt that Queen Anne Marie and her children belong to the King's extended family (they are his aunt and first cousins respectively), but is that the same as saying that they are members of the Danish Royal Family? For instance, they are not even in the line of succession to the Danish throne.

An earlier version of the Danish Royal House's website read:

The Royal House

Having existed for more than 1000 years, the Danish Monarchy is one of the oldest in the world. The two large houses of the Danish Monarchy are the House of Oldenborg and the House of Glücksborg. In 1863, the House of Glücksborg succeeded the House of Oldenborg. The present Royal Family are the direct descendants of the House of Glücksborg.

The members of the Royal House include Her Majesty The Queen, His Royal Highness The Prince Consort, His Royal Highness The Crown Prince, Her Royal Highness The Crown Princess, His Royal Highness Prince Christian, Her Royal Highness Princess Isabella, His Royal Highness Prince Joachim, Her Royal Highness Princess Marie, His Highness Prince Nikolai, His Highness Prince Felix, His Highness Prince Henrik, Her Royal Highness Princess Benedikte and Her Highness Princess Elisabeth.

The Royal Family comprises Her Majesty The Queen’s relatives, including Her Majesty Queen Anne-Marie.

The Danish Monarchy - The Royal House

web.archive.org

Though interestingly, that last paragraph was only included in the English-language version of the page.

 

[Mbruno]

An earlier version of the Danish Royal House's website read:

The Royal House​

​

Having existed for more than 1000 years, the Danish Monarchy is one of the oldest in the world. The two large houses of the Danish Monarchy are the House of Oldenborg and the House of Glücksborg. In 1863, the House of Glücksborg succeeded the House of Oldenborg. The present Royal Family are the direct descendants of the House of Glücksborg.​

​

The members of the Royal House include Her Majesty The Queen, His Royal Highness The Prince Consort, His Royal Highness The Crown Prince, Her Royal Highness The Crown Princess, His Royal Highness Prince Christian, Her Royal Highness Princess Isabella, His Royal Highness Prince Joachim, Her Royal Highness Princess Marie, His Highness Prince Nikolai, His Highness Prince Felix, His Highness Prince Henrik, Her Royal Highness Princess Benedikte and Her Highness Princess Elisabeth.​

​

The Royal Family comprises Her Majesty The Queen’s relatives, including Her Majesty Queen Anne-Marie.​

​

The Danish Monarchy - The Royal House

web.archive.org

Though interestingly, that last paragraph was only included in the English-language version of the page.

So my understanding is that Queen Anne Marie is considered to be a member of the Royal Family (as defined above), but not of the Royal House.

In that old page, the members of the Royal House seemed to be all persons who were in the line of succession to the throne at the time plus their respective consorts (when applicable), which is an objective criterion. I wonder what the cutoff point for the Royal Family would be though. Does it include Queen Anne Marie's children too? What about her grandchildren?

 

[Somebody]

I don't think there is an official cut-off point - as long as they are invited to events of the Danish royal family, I assume they will continue to show up under the listing of 'Royal family' (just like for example prince Gustav and princess Carina did recently).

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I'll continue the discussion on membership of the Danish Royal Family in the Danish forum, here:

Members of the Royal Family and Line of Succession - Broadest Sense

:previous: Wouldn't the husbands and children of the younger daughters also be Princes and Princesses in this scenario, given that Princess Benedikte's husband was offered a princely title if he would agree to move to Denmark? Probably - although Richard himself already was a prince of SWB by...

www.theroyalforums.com