Leonor's Naval Training: Alleged Grade Erasures and Favoritism

Princess Leonor on the Elcano: Official narrative vs. leaked records

Princess Leonor completed her service in the Spanish Navy with full honors. The official account describes flawless training, treating her as just another midshipman among peers, with strict standards applied without exception. However, the fine print tells a different story. According to leaks circulated by media outlets critical of the Royal Household, this conclusion was far from exemplary: two failures in technical subjects allegedly erased from her file, at least one disciplinary breach removed from the system, and physical performance that, according to these same sources, fell below that of her classmates.

The pattern, they say, repeats itself across centers: Zaragoza, Marín, Elcano, and Blas de Lezo. Favoritism, positions of honor, and a lack of real demands. All orchestrated, they argue, to project the image of a competent and prepared heir. The uncomfortable question is not whether the princess is smart. The uncomfortable question is who signs the orders that erase a failing grade.

What the leaks say about grades and discipline

The core of the matter lies in the paperwork. According to collected testimonies, Leonor allegedly received two failures in technical subjects during her military training. Both reportedly disappeared from her record due to unwritten orders from high-ranking officials. Added to this is at least one disciplinary breach that was also removed to protect her public image.

The most repeated phrase in these accounts comes from a cadet who privately summarizes it thus: there are physical tests she would not have completed, exercises repeated until exhaustion for everyone except her. This is not an accusation of incompetence. It is an accusation of double standards.

The atmosphere on board, always according to these versions, was tense both on the Elcano and the Blas de Lezo. Many classmates felt they were witnessing a military fiction: a career built more on surname than merit. And yet, silence. Speaking out can bring reprisals, and no one wants to confront the Royal Household or the high command.

Instructions allegedly received by instructors

The most delicate link in the chain is not the students. It is the instructors. According to several testimonies, internal meetings heard slogans like "avoid negative notes," "do not give failing grades," or "make her way easier." Phrases that, if true, turn the instructor into an accomplice and the record into propaganda.

There is a detail that fits this picture: before entering the Military Academy of Zaragoza or the Naval School of Marín, she was allegedly advised to get fit. She did not. It was repeated before boarding the Elcano. Again, no. An officer sums it up with a painful phrase: it is not a matter of intelligence, but of attitude. She puts more effort into protocol; physical fitness is not her strength.

Meanwhile, everything is prepared so she receives the highest distinctions. Although, according to these same sources, her physical performance was the lowest in the group. Here lies the knot: recognition is awarded anyway, and that is precisely what erodes the institution it claims to protect.

The family precedent no one wants to remember

The most repeated argument in defense of special treatment is that a future head of state cannot be trained exactly like the others. That he needs more years, more work, and a different type of preparation. It is a defensible thesis. The problem is that it clashes with the explicit request of his parents: that she be treated as just another student. If that was formally requested, the pantomime starts there.

And there is historical memory of the issue. A former colonel has maintained that something similar peine with her grandfather. And there is a circulating account of a professor who failed Felipe VI during his training stage and whose superiors allegedly asked him to review the exam as many times as necessary until he passed. The anecdote, true or not, serves as a framework: the problem is not of this generation, it is structural.

Why only media critical of the Royal Household publish this

Here appears the second front, as interesting as the first: the silence. Most major media outlets would not have touched the subject. Only publications critical of the institution, including ElNacional.cat, and portals specialized in the Royal Household have picked it up. This feeds two opposing readings.

The first: there is soft censorship, self-censorship, or simple convenience. The second: the information lacks proof and therefore is not published in media with legal services. The leaks rely on anonymous internal sources, unnamed testimonies, and documents that no one has exhibited. The conditional —"allegedly," "according to sources"— is the only honest way to tell it.

That is where the credibility problem lies. If the information were false, a lawsuit from the Royal Household would be devastating for the outlet publishing it. If it were true, the scandal would not be the record of a student: it would be the chain of command that decided to manipulate it.

Favoritism as norm, not exception

There is a current of analysis that goes beyond the specific case and argues that the problem is not the princess, but the system surrounding her. In the Army, it is argued, women already receive differentiated treatment in many postings. That here it is the heir only makes it more visible.

Another current responds with a different argument: if she has not passed a competitive examination, if she will only stay three years and is going to graduate top of her class earning several times more than her classmates, favoritism begins before boarding the ship. It is not a criticism of her, they add. It is the realization that she is not a soldier nor will she be, and asking for "equal treatment" when the starting point is already different sounds like a joke.

With these elements, the predictable outcome is that the matter fades without resolution: no lawsuit, no public audit of the file, and no detailed denial. The institution will continue awarding distinctions and critical media will continue publishing leaks. What there almost certainly will not be is an independent audit of that record. And without it, doubt remains installed.