Talk:Knud, Hereditary Prince of Denmark

Untitled
We cannot know for sure that his name as king would have been Knud VII. It is not even likely. The names Frederik and Christian were both included in the names of the hereditary prince, maybe to honor the ancestors but those also happen to be the names of Danish kings for 500 years. So more likely, his name as king would have been Christian XI. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.52.71.211 (talk) 18:24, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

I miss a detailed reference to, why the Arveprins did not take the throne. Some claim, that he was deniet the throne, because of retardation due the extensive inbreading among european royals over the centuries. This is also reflected in the old danish saying "En gang til for arveprins kund" - "One more time for arveprins Knud", sugesting, that the prins wasn't the brightest star on the horizon. Since I have met his son count Ingolf, I would not be suprised, if there where some truth to that.


 * The danish saying "One more time for prins Knud", is not a reference to his intelligence, but just a reference to his lack of grace. In a show at the Royal Opera he was asked after the show, if he enjoyed the show, and he answered truthfully: "Yes, but I really wish I could have seen the dancescene better" (The royal seats are in the side of the opera, and actually have a rather poor view of the stage). The Opera then repeated the scene with the words: "Vi tager den én gang til for Prins Knud". Carewolf 14:07 17th Feb 2007 (UTC)

Thou it wasnt originally ment to be a reference to his intelligence, it is by far the most Danes considered to be that, and with good reason, he wasnt too bright (not downright retarded as some claim, but he was in the lower-mid of the normal spectrum of intelligence). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.55.59.182 (talk) 00:04, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Please expand

The law was not changed to deny Knud the throne. There had long been a wish for changes in the constitution. However, the constitution of the time (from 1915) required a referendum where the number of yes votes needed not only exceed the number of no votes, it has to be at least 45% of those with the right to vote. This is a very difficult criterion to meet. An attempt had been made in 1939, and failed by a few thousand votes.

Princess Margrethe was immensely popular, and it was thought that changing the sucession might get people out to vote. As indeed it did. One of the things changed was that he requirement for a change in the constitution was lowered to 40%. --Klausok (talk) 15:20, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Title
Also did he kept his title of Hereditary Prince after he ceased to be heir presumptive?--Queen Elizabeth II&#39;s Little Spy (talk) 21:12, 9 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes. The title "arveprins" has in practise only been granted to an heir presumptive, but it does not in principle mean heir presumptive. It is a title granted by the king. It has been granted only three times:


 * To arveprins Frederik, brother and heir presumptive of Christian VII (died 1808). Frederik was displaced from the position of heir by the birth of a son of the king, the later king Frederik VI. He would not have become king anyway, as he predeceased his brother.


 * To arveprins Ferdinand, son of arveprins Frederik and uncle and heir presumptive of king Frederik VII (died 1863). Ferdinand would have become king if he had lived a few months longer.


 * And to arveprins Knud


 * None of the beares have become king. The title was not granted to prince Christian Frederik, son of arveprins Frederik, who was heir presumptive throughout the reign of his cousin Frederik VI (died 1838), and who succeeded him as king Christian VIII.
 * --Klausok (talk) 20:51, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I have put a citation needed against the years of the title. I have not been able to find a source for when the title was granted. I have from hearsay that it was granted as a consolation prize for loosing the status as heir. --Klausok (talk) 10:45, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

I found a source. Unfortunately it gives only the year, not the date. And it does not say why the title was granted. --Klausok (talk) 17:19, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

His wife's article says that she was hereditary princess from 27 March 1953. It does not give a source for this, however.--Klausok (talk) 10:44, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Prince Knud was only The Hereditary Prince of Denmark from 20 April 1947 – 5 June 1953. Margrethe was created heir in 1953 and Prince Knud ceased holding that title. HRH The Hereditary Prince Knud of Denmark (as a courtesy title) seems to be more suitable for him, post-1953?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CEF2:12F0:BDB9:26D0:187F:6EB6 (talk) 19:01, 5 June 2016 (UTC)


 * "Hereditary prince" is not a very good translation of "arveprins". A hereditary prince would be a prince whose title is hereditary. The prince of Monaco is a hereditary prince. "Prince inheritor" would be better. Literally it means "inherit prince", and it makes as little sense in Danish as in English. Klausok (talk) 19:29, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't know what more I can do. I have explained the situtation. I have placed a comment in the article itself. And still people keep putting in erroneous dates. I have tried to fix the latest edit as best I can, but I have a strong suspicion that the title prince of Iceland lapsed when Iceland became a republic in 1944. --Klausok (talk) 06:25, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Mistakes
I read many Danish articles about him and I know that he was not stupid. That is only a legend. And he was quite popular, many people wanted him as the next king because he was so friendly and charming. There was a difference of only 17000 votes in the referendum. The referendum was a vote FOR the daughters of the very popular Queen Ingrid and not AGAINST Knud (only in the rainbow press it was a vote against him). Queen Margrethe was only a child then. (Sorry for my English, I am German-/Danish-speaking :-) Danmark2011 (talk) 11:04, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Is there something in the article that implies that he was stupid? It's not clear to me what you are identifying as a "mistake".  But in any case, by all means, please be bold and edit the article to reflect what you know of Prince Knud, especially if you can cite sources to back up the statements you add.  --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 20:55, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, it's fine for you to cite sources that are in Danish. We all know how to use Google Translate.  On the other hand, if they are available, English-language sources would be even better for obvious reasons.  --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 20:57, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Oh excuse me, my fault, it's not mentioned in the article, that he is stupid, but in this talk. I will think about if I want to add something to the article :-) Danmark2011 (talk) 21:38, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Prince of Iceland and Hereditary Prince of Denmark
Wasn't he prince of Iceland when Iceland became an independent kingdom in 1918? Or was it only for his father (King) and brother (Crown Prince)? And I don't know usage of title hereditary prince in Denmark, but in Swedish nobility, the title hereditary prince of Sweden (arvfurste) was for who is heir of the Crown Prince (e.g. Prince Gustaf Adolf and for who is heir presumptive to the throne but he's not son of the reigning monarch (e.g. Prince Bertil). It might be same in Danish nobility. Tomás de H y B-P (talk) 09:53, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * In the section Title above, you can see how the Danish title arveprins works. --Klausok (talk) 10:53, 25 March 2020 (UTC)