Thanks Mr Muhler for your always fine posts.
I may understand that looks does matter. All the Royals and mostly Queens and Princesses are nowadays like Models. It is due to Coaches etc....
I have one question : Could their look be from the Wedding of Prince Knud to Princess Caroline Mathilde, they were close cousins?
You are welcome. ?
I don't know.
We know from cases of incest between very close relatives, that the children are usually perfectly normal in every way, so a one-off marriage between relatives shouldn't make that big a difference, I think.
Unless of course it becomes a habit over generations to marry relatives. See the Habsburg chin for example.
None of the three siblings could be described as traditionally beautiful although Prince Christian was quite statuesque in his youth. That said they all had what I myself have dubbed the "Glücksburg face" seen on several of their older relatives, Queen Margrethe, their Norwegian cousins, little Prince Henri etc... so they weren't one off in that gene pool. The descendants of Christian IX and Louise were a closeknit family and there were several intermarriages between their descendants.
Regarding the referendum involving among others the question of a change to the Law of succession it's worth noting that less than 19.000 votes (78.8% of votes cast were in favour of a change but because of a low turnout this corresponded to 45.8% of those entitled to vote) decided in favour of a change so the outcome wasn't as clear and given as we might think today.
It was
very close indeed!
45 % of all voters was needed to change the Constitution (it's 40 % now) in 1953.
It's no secret at all that the referendum regarding the change in the Law of Succession was attached to the referendum about the new Constitution in order to get enough people to vote - so there must have been a considerable public interest in the subject.
The then PM; HC Hansen, was a close personal friend of Frederik IX, which means he knew Frederik and his family intimately and being a PM he would also have knows Prince Knud and at least his wife, Caroline-Mathilde.
He would also have known that Frederik IX was anything but delighted about the prospect of his oldest daughter becoming monarch one day. It was a burden he wouldn't pass on to his daughter.
The idea about linking the referendum about the Constitution with a referendum about a change in the Law of Succession must have come up in earnest around 1950 or so. Because it was expected that the turnout would be very low as most people viewed the changes in the Constitution as something pretty abstract. Hence the linking.
But around 1950 both Margrethe and Ingolf would have been around ten years old, and apart from photos and newsreels, pretty much unknown to the general public, so what was the basis of peoples vote?
As I see it this is why people voted:
Most people would never have met members of the DRF in person and up close. Even fewer would have met them in an intimate setting. So what they knew about the DRF must mainly have been based on what other people talked/gossiped about and what they had seen and read in newsreels, papers and magazines.
Even though Frederik IX's family was well featured and very popular, especially during WWII, the reports and documentaries from their home, having tea and what now, really only started during the 50's - mainly
after the referendum in 1953. So there was little "propaganda" so to speak.
So why did the PM HC Hansen, go against the wishes of Frederik IX and doing so presumably in the certainty that people would turn out in numbers to vote, and to vote in favor of the change in the Law of Succession?
So this is what I think people based their vote on:
A) Because they believed in the principle of gender equality in regards to equal opportunities for both genders to have the same role. In this case being a monarch.
But this was 15-20 years before this topic became something that genuinely concerned the general public.
And according to that principle, Princess Elisabeth should have been the next monarch, not Ingolf.
B) Because they believed in the principle of primogeniture. Under the condition there were no sons. Well, then the oldest daughter has to take over. No need to go to another branch of the DRF.
C) Because it was basically a popularity contest between Frederik and Knud (and their wives. And probably to a lesser extent their children.) Frederik won.
- For whatever reason.
Perhaps a dislike for Knud. He was certainly nowhere near as folksy as his brother.
D) A general belief that Knud wasn't too bright. (There is a very famous song from that period, where the refrain has become a saying here in DK: "One more time for Prince Knud." - Today it means explaining something twice to someone who is a bit slow.) And as such not qualified to become king.
E) A general opinion that Knud, and his wife and his children, weren't particularly presentable looking. - And not only in looks but
also in their behavior and interaction with the public. That they paled in comparison to Frederik IX, his very presentable wife, Queen Ingrid, and the cute Three Little Princesses.
The "too ugly factor", even though it sounds and is harsh.
F) And this one I actually believe factored high as well in many people's minds: It was felt to be unfair towards Frederik IX and his wife, if their children were bypassed.
Because QMII was democratically elected as the next monarch. For the first time since before 1660. (And back then de facto only in principle.) But it was a gamble. Hardly anyone casting their vote knew Margrethe and Ingolf personally. They only knew
of them, at best. Everything else was based on photos, films and gossip.
G) Your suggestion.