Christening of Princess Estelle: May 22, 2012

[Tyger]

I noticed that W-A is very tall, you can really see that when everyone was walking outside.

He is quite a hunk of man, for sure. Does anyone know his actual height? I am guessing 6'4".

 

[Artemisia]

He is quite a hunk of man, for sure. Does anyone know his actual height? I am guessing 6'4".

The funny thing is, while he appears to tower over his fellow royals, he is not that tall. His height is 6' (183-184 cm). As such, he is just 5 cm taller than Prince Charles or Prince Carl Philip, and actually shorter than Prince Harry (6'2"), or Prince William (who is 6'3"). What makes him appear more powerfully built his built, which is slightly heaver than the Princes I mentioned.

 

[marine2109]

Victoria's pride shines through in Princess Estelle's baptism photos

Princess Estelle baptism: Official photos are released

 

[CrownPrincess5]

I don't like christening pictures at all. The red backdrop ruined the pictures IMO. I don't see why a photographer would want to photograph the royal family in that room.

 

[LadyFinn]

I don't like christening pictures at all. The red backdrop ruined the pictures IMO. I don't see why a photographer would want to photograph the royal family in that room.

I like the red background very much. But I don't like the coldness of the king at the photos. And I would have wanted to see Madeleine in one photo, she is the only family member missing.

According to Svensk Damtidning, Folke Bernadotte, the son of Estelle Bernadotte, gave little Estelle a bear his mother had carved.

 

[frogpearl]

I like the red background very much. But I don't like the coldness of the king at the photos. And I would have wanted to see Madeleine in one photo, she is the only family member missing.

According to Svensk Damtidning, Folke Bernadotte, the son of Estelle Bernadotte, gave little Estelle a bear his mother had carved.

I agree, I also missed Madeleine.

 

[Josefine]

how dirrerent one can see things

i thoght it got very warm with the red colour,

 

[Meraude]

And I would have wanted to see Madeleine in one photo, she is the only family member missing.

Have any other royal family had christening photos where an aunt or an uncle who wasn't a godparent been there with the child, its parents and grandparents?

 

[chelly]

From some I have seen, they do the same that the sweedish seemed to do. I don't understand which photo was Madeline missing. She was in the godparents picture.

 

[Meraude]

I don't understand which photo was Madeline missing. She was in the godparents picture.

No Medeleine is not on the godparents' photo, I think you mistake prince Daniel's sister Anna Westling Söderström, who was a godmother, for Madeleine.

If there was to be a photo of the whole family, then it shouldn't have been a photo of Estelle with the parents and two sets of grandparents, Carl Philip and Madeleine, Daniel's sister Anna, brother-in-law Mikael, two nieces, step-niece and step-nephew should also have been in that photo, as they are all part of Estelle's family.

 

[chelly]

No Medeleine is not on the godparents' photo, I think you mistake prince Daniel's sister Anna Westling Söderström, who was a godmother, for Madeleine.

If there was to be a photo of the whole family, then it shouldn't have been a photo of Estelle with the parents and two sets of grandparents, Carl Philip and Madeleine, Daniel's sister Anna, brother-in-law Mikael, two nieces, step-niece and step-nephew should also have been in that photo, as they are all part of Estelle's family.

I am sorry about that, I guess I was so used to her being a blonde. I never noticed she dyed her hair. For some reason in my head I also thought Madeleine was a Godparent. I tend to have more interest in Victoria. Though I am getting a bit more curious about Madeleine and C-P.

Maybe they just thought that a pic with the godparents, grandparents, parents would have been enough. They could have done a private family photo also.

 

[Prinsessan]

I agree with the last posts. I'm not missing Madeleine as the family photos are with the godparents and the grandparents and she is neither one of them

 

[LadyFinn]

Daniel's cousin Sara Westling at the christening
https://asa.svenskdam.se/files/2012/05/prinsessa1.jpg

From Neue Post
Neue Post: Lesen Sie Neue Post

The king said at the press conference in South Korea about inviting Chris and Sofia to the christening: That is the most natural thing in the world. It is always a good reason, if anything else, to meet one another. The reporter said that the royal couple has been widely praised about breaking the royal rules. The king was suprised about that.
Därför bjöd kungen Chris och Sofia | Nyheter | Aftonbladet

Pilgrim Center Tyresö gave Victoria, Daniel and Estelle pilgrim staffs as a christening gift.
Uppdrag: Pilgrimsstav till prinsessan Estelle

Video
Nyheterna: Prinsessan Estelle döptes i dag - TV4 Play

Princess Estelle - a set on Flickr -

 

[CrownPrincess5]

I like the red background very much. But I don't like the coldness of the king at the photos. And I would have wanted to see Madeleine in one photo, she is the only family member missing.

At first I thought he was cold, but when I lingered on the photo a little bit longer it seemed to me that he was feeling more awkward if anything. The king never really smiles, even at Victorias wedding he didn't smile all that much. But those pictures will be around forever so he could've at least made an effort. Let's not forget the King wanted his son to inherit the throne. I think holding little Stella was a reminder of how pushed back Carl Philip is from the throne.

 

[Hans-Rickard]

It is official photos. He is the King and his duty is to look majestic and regal at every official portrait. I'm sure he jokes around at private family photos.

 

[Lalaika]

It is official photos. He is the King and his duty is to look majestic and regal at every official portrait. I'm sure he jokes around at private family photos.

I agree, they sure took many fotos with the king smiling and doting at his granddaughter but as these are official photos for the public I'm fine with him not smiling...

 

[Thena]

At first I thought he was cold, but when I lingered on the photo a little bit longer it seemed to me that he was feeling more awkward if anything. The king never really smiles, even at Victorias wedding he didn't smile all that much. But those pictures will be around forever so he could've at least made an effort. Let's not forget the King wanted his son to inherit the throne. I think holding little Stella was a reminder of how pushed back Carl Philip is from the throne.

The king usually keeps a neutral expression in most photos. I find that it's rare to get a picture of him smiling. However, I noticed that during the christening, he did smile when he looked at Estelle.

As for his feeling regarding Carl Philip and the throne, it wasn't the king's decision. He's a constitutional monarch without much power and has to accept whatever changes the government institutes to the line of succession. It's been more than 30 years since they changed the succession and I'm sure the king adjusted to it by now. A still photo is just a two-dimensional image of a single moment and doesn't fully represent how much the king probably adores his first grandchild.

 

[PrincessApple]

They might just have been following what happens in their respective houses. I don't think Willem-Alexander or Frederik wore a uniform to their own children's christenings either.

I had not thought of that. It does seem a possible reason.

 

[grevinnan]

At first I thought he was cold, but when I lingered on the photo a little bit longer it seemed to me that he was feeling more awkward if anything. The king never really smiles, even at Victorias wedding he didn't smile all that much. But those pictures will be around forever so he could've at least made an effort. Let's not forget the King wanted his son to inherit the throne. I think holding little Stella was a reminder of how pushed back Carl Philip is from the throne.

The King's objection was to the retroactive aspect of the law change. Considering that a daughter and son had been born while the new law was being worked and voted on I have to agree. Either state a beginning date of the new law at the onset of discussions or make the effective date the date it was signed into law. The way it was handled with making Victoria the Crownprincess after Prince Carl Philip born into the position was very poorly planned. It could easily have been avoided if the effective date had been part of the discussions and planning.

 

[suztav]

Agree with the King on this one --- Carl Philip was born the Crown Prince End of story until the next generation.

 

[Hans-Rickard]

Agree with the King on this one --- Carl Philip was born the Crown Prince End of story until the next generation.

They knew before Carl Philip was born that the constitution was going to change and they knew how it would be changed so they should never have made him Crown Prince !

 

[Hans-Rickard]

The king usually keeps a neutral expression in most photos. I find that it's rare to get a picture of him smiling. However, I noticed that during the christening, he did smile when he looked at Estelle.

As for his feeling regarding Carl Philip and the throne, it wasn't the king's decision. He's a constitutional monarch without much power and has to accept whatever changes the government institutes to the line of succession. It's been more than 30 years since they changed the succession and I'm sure the king adjusted to it by now. A still photo is just a two-dimensional image of a single moment and doesn't fully represent how much the king probably adores his first grandchild.

Completely agree !

 

[Esmerelda]

We might be reading too much into the King's expression. He looked happy and proud at the christening and he isn't a very publicly affectionate person. For all we know, Estelle could have needed her nappy changed.

 

[Meraude]

Agree with the King on this one --- Carl Philip was born the Crown Prince End of story until the next generation.

A change of a law doesn't happen in a day, at least not in Sweden. To change the order of succession in Sweden there have to be two votings in the parliament with an election between the votings. The change in the order of succession took place in 1980, there was a general election in 1979 and the law text for the new succession order was written in 1977. The political parties in the parliament didn't see a reason why they should dicharge a proposed change and wait four more years for a new succession order.

 

[grevinnan]

Agree with the King on this one --- Carl Philip was born the Crown Prince End of story until the next generation.

Actually either neither or both were born as the Crown Princess/Prince. The law change was not a secret and was going to happen. Until a firm date of the change had been legislated neither of them should have been named Crown...

 

[rop81]

Actually either neither or both were born as the Crown Princess/Prince. The law change was not a secret and was going to happen. Until a firm date of the change had been legislated neither of them should have been named Crown...

It´s not like you just name them crownprince/crownprincess - it´s something that happens naturally when the first child of the king is born, back then only if it was a boy, much like when a new king/queen becomes sovereign - it happens automaticly. When they passed the law they didn´t know the sex of the child so in one way it was logical to make the only child born yet the heir, even though it became strange in this case since the second child that was born was a boy and then ofcourse became crownprince until the law had come in affect.

 

[grevinnan]

It´s not like you just name them crownprince/crownprincess - it´s something that happens naturally when the first child of the king is born, back then only if it was a boy, much like when a new king/queen becomes sovereign - it happens automaticly. When they passed the law they didn´t know the sex of the child so in one way it was logical to make the only child born yet the heir, even though it became strange in this case since the second child that was born was a boy and then ofcourse became crownprince until the law had come in affect.

The process for changing the law had already started when Victoria was born even though it was not completed until after Carl Philip's birth. The strange part of the process was that they made the law retroactive and thereby making Victoria the Crown princess. Had they made the law effective prospectively then Carl Philip would have remained the Crown prince. Consequently they could have waited with proclaiming a Crown Princess/Prince until the law was signed. But I don't think anyone expected the law to be in effect retroactively.

 

[Meraude]

The process for changing the law had already started when Victoria was born even though it was not completed until after Carl Philip's birth. The strange part of the process was that they made the law retroactive and thereby making Victoria the Crown princess. Had they made the law effective prospectively then Carl Philip would have remained the Crown prince. Consequently they could have waited with proclaiming a Crown Princess/Prince until the law was signed. But I don't think anyone expected the law to be in effect retroactively.

The only reason why the law can be seen as retroactive is that Carl Philip was a boy and not a girl. The changes in the order of succession was known to the king and everyone else in Sweden before the birth of Carl Philip. If the king and queen had wanted to avoid a potentially messy situation with who was to be the heir, they could have waited with having their second child to after January 1980.

 

[grevinnan]

The only reason why the law can be seen as retroactive is that Carl Philip was a boy and not a girl. The changes in the order of succession was known to the king and everyone else in Sweden before the birth of Carl Philip. If the king and queen had wanted to avoid a potentially messy situation with who was to be the heir, they could have waited with having their second child to after January 1980.

The effective date was not known. It was decided after Carl Philip was born and the order of succession was signed into law. The King and Queen had no way of knowing (and neither did anyone else) that it would be retroactive. The effective date of the new constitution was Jan. 1, 1980. It was then deemed that it applied to the two royal children at the time and consequently Victoria as the firstborn became Crownprincess. The discussion regarding a change in the succession had actually started when Carl Gustaf became King. At the time Prince Bertil was the only option for a successor in case the King died or did not have a son (he was at the time not married yet either) as his sisters were not able to succeed him.

 

[Meraude]

Here is a link to the propositon on changes in the order of succession, from December 8, 1977: Propositioner och skrivelser - riksdagen.se

In §1 it mentions children of king Carl XVI Gustav and that an elder child will have precedence over a younger child. If the king would have wanted it any other way, the time for him to protest how the order of succession was written was before it went to voting in the Swedish parliament, not after it had been ratified, i.e. after the birth of Carl Philip, then it was too late for any objections.