Danish Royal children of Prince Joaquin stripped of “Prince “ and “Princess titles

[Rainbowqueeen]

www.euronews.com/amp/2022/09/29/shocked-and-confused-denmarks-queen-strips-royal-titles-from-grandchildren

I thought this was interesting given the views that King a Charles has on slimming down the British RF. Wonder if he has discussed it with Daisy??

This way it looks like the elder two, Alexandra’s children, have been HRH Prince until adulthood. Whereas the younger two, Marie’s children, have had them stripped while they are still children.

I think losing a title when you're a kid would be a lot better than growing into adulthood as a prince or princess, and then suddenly not being one. And does such a title have any meaning when it comes with an expiry date? Not that it has any real anyway I guess. Best just to get rid at one fell swoop, so to speak.

And I don't think any of them have been HRH for some years, have they?

I think the “if your Granny can just take it away with a weeks notice does it mean anything?” point is also an interesting one.

I think the issues are similar to those here. Logic says that Joachim’s children and Harry’s children not having princely titles is no big deal at all.

However, it’s always going to be a big thing when the first change is made. Add into that that Meghan and Marie are seen as being unpopular within the royal families then it changes the optic from “streamlined titles” to “kids of unpopular mother lose titles”.

To be honest I think she's done well in a difficult role. I don't think Denmark is an easy place in which to assimilate. I think she was always going to be more scrutinised as an outsider, so it's almost like she thinks she has to be 'extra perfect' to make up for it.

I also think the same about Kate Middleton, she may have some perceived inferiority over not being born into aristocracy, so therefore takes on the role in a big way, and never steps out of line. Whereas those born into it are a bit more relaxed and are forgiven many mistakes, basically because they know we are stuck with them.

As for the princes and princesses losing their titles, surely it's better than waiting around until they are 25, if that was always going to be the case then having the titles was just a formality. This means they can get on with their lives outside of the royal sphere, in some ways they have a bit more freedom.

I think this is Daisy giving Chaz air cover for what he wants to do in our own RF. I’ll bet the house they discussed it at the funeral and QM agreed to set the precedent that HMK will follow. Didn’t Sweden do something similar? They’re not acting independently.

Sweden was similar but with an important difference. The children of Madeleine and Carl Philip lost HRH but still have Prince and Princess.

The closest parallel is the Netherlands. The King's brothers' children are counts and countesses, but that determination was made before they were born.

Sweden changed the rules so that the oldest child inherited the throne whether they be male or female. Unfortunately the rule was backdated and the King had both a girl and a younger boy who had been crown Prince. Apparently the King was really unhappy about the change, but tough.

Do they want Prince and Princess for them? What's your source in that? Because right now (and unless and until new Letters Patent are issued) they officially are Prince and Princess but I see no evidence that those titles are being used.

This seems, on the face of it, more in line with the "brought up without titles" hypothesis than the "now they want Prince and Princess" hypothesis.

Yes I heard that too.

I wonder if that's why he didn't remove the Prince and Princess titles from Carl Philip's and Madeleine's kids? Just removing the HRH sounds kind of like a half measure. The children are still Duke and Duchess of Swedish regions too, even though Madeleine's kids are growing up in Florida.

But that change was already in the works when Carl Philip was born so it was anticipated. He was only a few months old when the law went into effect.

I don’t think for a moment she’d change the timescale of this, causing friction with her own son, to grease a path that the British royal family have had ample time and opportunity to do for themselves.

The Swedish grandchildren are still princes and princesses. They’re just not part of the royal house and no longer HRH.

Victoria is Sweden was the heir till her brother arrived. Changing the rule so she was heir again was only restoring the previous status quo but it was reported the king thought it unfair on his son. Turned out for the best really, CP's wife is lovely but she had a slightly interesting past which might have made her a bold choice for Queen, the apparently delightful Prince Daniel is probs a better consort option.

My “source” is the OW interview where M made it clear she wanted Archie to be Prince like the ( then) Cambridge DC . She tried to pass it off as it would give him
security but we all know that doesn’t follow .
If they don’t want the titles , the simplest thing to do is make a statement ( they like making statements) and say that they have decided against their DC using titles .
If reports are correct they are trying to edit H’s memoir and the Netflix series so as not to rock the boat and it’s not a huge leap to think it is so that Charles will soften towards them.

They chose not to have the Dumbarton earldom. ‘They didn’t like the idea of Archie being called the Earl of Dumbarton because it began with the word ‘dumb’ [and] they were worried about how that might look’

Who knows what the reason was, though. But they were offered it.

www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/a36842823/meghan-harry-earl-of-dumbarton-archie-harrison/

How does that change your life? He still lives a life of luxury beyond your imagination, and get to keep his inheritance etc.

Why don't the Danes like Marie? She seems sweet and unpretentious.
Interestingly Joachim's father prince Henrik struggled with only being Prince Consort and at one point threw a tantrum and ran off to France because he thought his status was diminished.

I don't know whether that is true or not but they would still have had the option for him to be Lord Archie Mountbatten-Windsor. Both are courtesy titles. Plus, the Dumbarton title was for Harry's use in Scotland so they would not necessarily have to use it for Archie.

I was wondering the same about Marie. She doesn't appear to have the ego her doppelgänger sister in law does either.

It would seem that the elder sons of Prince Jochiam are sad about their "loss of their identity". It is understandable they are in their 20s and were Princes since birth. I would imagine it's quite disturbing. It also seems to have been done in a very unkind way.

I have always admired Anne, Edward and Sophie's approach to their children's titles or lack of them. I also really admire Harry and Meghan too on this stance, I thought it was very bold (although maybe not what they actually wanted).

I didn't know much about the Danish RF. Prince Fred seems like a really interesting bloke and clever too.

It seems unfair to give then the Prince or princess only to take it away. I can see why its upsetting.

If they want to make changes it should be for future family members. Not taking away existing titles. I can see this would be upsetting.
I think must be hugely damaging to family relationship to have a feted and adored heir and a "spare " who is treated like a second class citizen and whose importance further wains as his older sibling has DC . But I guess that's royalty, there's nothing fair and equal about it!

His ex wife was very popular, very smart and striking , and was close to the Queen, she would have been a big rival to Mary.
Marie seems like a downgrade from Alexandra. And was never as popular .

The oldest grandson, Prince Nikolai, had been fairly openly trading on his title - his instagram handle, obviously working as a model with his title being used, and appearing in ads like this - I wonder of the Queen just thought she needed to nip this in the bud now before there were four grandchildren out there doing similar?

twitter.com/saadsalman719/status/1575829581885763584?s=21&t=v2tIxyPah9mhY7Dv20aelg

@Serenster Interesting. It looks like he is the only one in that ad who is in line to inherit a throne that actually exists. I get the Queen's thinking here. His brother is a model too I believe. I'm not surprised, his mum is beautiful.

She would never have been a 'rival' to Mary. Mary is Crown Princess and will be queen of Denmark. Alexandra is a mere Countess, and not even married to the 'spare' anymore. Royal status doesn't depend on 'popularity', intelligence, or 'looks'.

This isn't a dig at you, but I don't really like this idea of women automatically being 'rivals' just because they are, or were, married to brothers. We see it with certain other royal couples too.

Alexandra is only a Countess because she remarried.

Somewhat interestingly she was popular enough with the family and the government that when she divorced Joachim she was created as a Countess for life and as a Princess until such times as she remarried. She was also put on their version of the civil list for life, but herself ended that in 2020 when her youngest turned 18.

Neither do I IcedPurple ,but Whilst still married , Alexandra was very popular, and didn’t lose her title till she remarried.
Mary wasn’t very popular.