Engagement of Crown Princess Victoria and Daniel Westling: February 24, 2009


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I was wondering...in 2010 the princesses and future queens Amalia, Ingrid Alexandra and Elisabeth would be old enough to be the flower girls at Crown Princess Victoria's wedding. Isn't Victoria the godmother of almost all future heirs to throne? That would be so nice to see her godchildren acting as flowerchildren at their godmothers wedding. Oh how much I would love to see them all around Victoria's and Daniel's big day....
 
:previous: I don't have anything against The Crown Princess or Daniel, but I agree with you. I dislike both Salic law and equal primogeniture (because there isn't much equality in it). Male-preferance seems best to me.

Christian will indeed be one of the few kings in the sea of queens. Even those kings who'll reign during his reign will have queens consort, while queens regnant most likely won't have kings consort. So it would be like 10 queens in Europe and 3-4 kings :nonono: If they really want equality, then they should treat husbands of female monarchs like they treat wives of male monarchs.


What nonsense. They are just inane titles to begin with. Wives of kings have no power, not that kings have any power, either, today. Husbands of queens are princes or dustmen, but who cares, they will have a life stipends and do nothing, also.
 
More about the ring
Victoria to TT:
-It is a white diamond. I was very carefully, (so) that it would have a Kimberley Process Certificate

TT to Daniel: Did you already have the ring, when you went on your knees?
Mmm... (I guess this would mean yes ;) )

TT to Victoria: And was it to your satisfaction directly?
In fact me had already said yes, before me had seen it. It doesn´t depend on the ring


http://brollop.menmo.se/arbetarbladet/news.html?newsId=7463
 
I heard the happy news about Princess Victoria and Daniel Westling's engagement on Tuesday. She's finally engaged! Victoria looked so happy in the pictures. I was suprised to hear that they will get married in the summer of 2010. That's a long time from now. Like everyone else, I can't wait to see the royal wedding! Congratulations to Victoria and Daniel!:heart1:
 
COngratulations! Good news in a sea of not so good news (the economy & the wars) I think it will work out. Daniel will need time to adjust but i think he will. He will require time to learn things etc.
He reminds me of Cmdr Tim Laurence, the husbnd of Princess Anne. Now there is a man who has been a model of discretion. Never a scandal from him.
 
Wow, FINALLY!!!!!! I guess with the economic downturn the world is going through right now, they decided to have it next year. I also think 1 1/2 years would help Daniel get accustomed to his new role.
 
Victoria and Daniel celebrated their engagement with a family celebration last night at the Drottningholm Castle. According to Expressen, Queen Silvia had planned it for weeks. Daniel´s parents and her sister Anna were there, princess Madeleine with Jonas Bergström, prince Carl Philip, princess Christina, princess Desiree... Emma Pernald wasn´t there, she was ill.
Aftonbladet/Här festar de kungligt

More stories:
Expressen/Kungen höll tal för alla
Svensk Damtidning/Bara de närmaste var med på förlovningsmiddagen

Daniel Westling's family arrive to the Drottningholm castle for the engagement party
ANP Beeldbank
Jonas Bergström, Princess Madeleine and prince Carl Philip arrive to the Drottningholm castle
ANP Beeldbank
ANP Beeldbank
Daniel Westling gave his first interview to newspaper Expressen after the engagement to Crown Princess Victoria was announced. He has gone back to his routine and daily life at his Gym Balance Training in central Stockholm. Expressen met him after his lunch break in the city and he said he is extremely happy and that he understands what is expected of him. He will do his very best in his work and support next to the Crown Princess.
ANP Beeldbank
ANP Beeldbank
ANP Beeldbank
ANP Beeldbank
ANP Beeldbank

Hola!/DANIEL WESTLING: DE ENTRENADOR PERSONAL A FUTURO PRÍNCIPE DE SUECIA
 
I hope their first child is a boy. Poor Prince Christian of Denmark will end up being the only King among a sea of Queens in years to come thanks to the changes in the law. I would have preferred the succession laws regarding males to have stayed the same as well. It would have been so much more interesting to have seen Carl-Philip get married and know his wife was going to be a future Queen than it is to watch Daniel Westling.

We have had a number of Crown Princes getting married in recent years and seeing their wives transform from into into future queens. I therefore think that on this occassion where we have a Crown Princess in her own right getting married is interesting in itself.

I do agree with you that seeing a woman transform into a fairytale princess is probably more interesting for some people than a man transforming into a prince (he'll have even better cut suits, higher quality ties?!). However, I think people are just going to have to put up with the fact that the Swedish succession laws rightly or wrongly are what they are and as such, Crown Princess Victoria should be just as highly regarded as her male counterparts.

As for little Prince Christian of Denmark, I'm not sure he will be too bothered about being practically the only King amongst all those Queens. However, I do feel that he will find it easier to find a spouse than his female counterparts. :flowers:
 
About bloodly time! Congratulations to Victoria and Daniel from the other side of the world! :D
 
Emma Pernald wasn´t there, she was ill.

that's another story i know but unless i was wearing my head under my arm i would have shown up. strange (or maybe not?) that she wasn't there keeping in mind all these stories circulating about the couple :whistling:

Daniel Westling gave his first interview to newspaper Expressen after the engagement to Crown Princess Victoria was announced. He has gone back to his routine and daily life at his Gym Balance Training in central Stockholm. Expressen met him after his lunch break in the city and he said he is extremely happy and that he understands what is expected of him. He will do his very best in his work and support next to the Crown Princess.
ANP Beeldbank
ANP Beeldbank
ANP Beeldbank
ANP Beeldbank
ANP Beeldbank

WHY ON EARTH did he take off his glasses on engagement day. He looks like a different personality without them (and not for the better). Daniel is a good looking man but even better looking with that special edge those glasses provide - he's definitely a "glasses-person".
 
WHY ON EARTH did he take off his glasses on engagement day. He looks like a different personality without them (and not for the better). Daniel is a good looking man but even better looking with that special edge those glasses provide - he's definitely a "glasses-person".
I was asking me the same, he looks so much better with glasses.
 
It seems that many have a different attitude to commoner women marrying princes than to commoner men marrying princesses. For some reason, it seems to bother people when the Cinderella story isn't fulfilled.

Just wanted to remind people that the Cinderella-story is not about a scullery maid becoming princess but about a young lady of the nobility deprived of her rightful place in society through machinations of evil relatives is restored to her rightful place by the prince. So if exiled Royal princess Theodora of Greece was to become Princess William of Wales and later Queen Consort of the Uk, this would be a kind of Cinderella-story, as she has been deprived of her position as a princess of a ruling House and would be restored to that place by the prince. Commoner-born Mary Donaldson becoming Crown Princess of Denmark is not a Cinderella-story.

I can't recall any fairytale-story where a scullery maid actually becomes princess.
 
I am completely for equal primogeniture, why degrade women by saying that because of your sex, you will somehow be less capable as a monarch? No matter how anyone else tries to explain it, that's what male-preference laws comes down to.

Male-preferance primogeniture has little to do with capability to reign. It's for continuity of dynasties - usually men pass on their house/family name. That's the cruel truth in most of Europe.

But there is still inequality in equal primogeniture. Wives of male monarchs share their spouses' title, while husbands of female monarchs don't. The reason why husbands of queens regnant aren't kings - they don't want the monarch to be outranked by her spouse :nonono: Isn't it degrading for women to say that the title of queen ranks lower than the title of king?
 
: Isn't it degrading for women to say that the title of queen ranks lower than the title of king?

I agree with you, Kotroman about the title of queen. Ideally (in a perfect world) the title of King and Queen should considered equal; unfortunately, we don't live in a perfect world. It has always bothered me that the title of queen is seen as less than king, and thus we have the title prince consort. It's kind of a reverse discrimination, IMO. When a non-royal female spouse marries the king, she is still known as Queen; but for men, this is not the case. I believe that an earlier poster said it best, "royalty is not about equality". :ermm:
 
I believe that an earlier poster said it best, "royalty is not about equality". :ermm:

But then I ask: why do we have equal primogeniture if it doesn't make all royal men and women equal? :nonono:
 
But then I ask: why do we have equal primogeniture if it doesn't make all royal men and women equal? :nonono:

Equal primogeniture is a relatively new concept. It has to start with those who are in direct line to a throne and over time, once everyone gets used to it, it can be reformed to apply to the styles and titles of their spouses. The title "King" is so old and ingrained as to having absolute power and authority that one can see how the public and government would question who was ultimately in charge in the monarchy between a Queen regnant and King consort.
 
But then I ask: why do we have equal primogeniture if it doesn't make all royal men and women equal? :nonono:

But equal primogeniture does make all royal men and women equal: the oldest child becomes the sovereign regardless of the child's gender.

What everyone is discussing is really the separate issue of titles. The women and men who inherit the title of monarch are treated equally. For example, a woman becomes the queen or duchesses in her own right. Where the inequality comes in is how to address the consort. For female spouses, there is no issue because there is a long tradition of calling them queen or duchess. But for male spouses, for whom there have historically been so few, there is no tradition of calling them king or duke when their wives have been the title holders.

I believe this is due to the connotation of the words king or duke: people assume a man who carries such a title is the one who inherited it, not his wife. Giving a male consort a different title prevents that misunderstanding. However, if enough women become title holders and enough men, by extension, become consorts, this issue will likely be addressed in the future in the interests of full equality.
 
It seems to me that the problem (if it is a problem) we have here is somewhat complex and confused by the fact that although there is a specific title available for the wife of a male monarch, there is no specific title for the husband of a female monarch.

In my opinion, a monarch whether male or female should be considered of equal status and it follows therefore that the spouse (whether male or female) of a monarch should be considered of equal status too. As such, Daniel Westling once he married Victoria, should be accorded the same status as, for example, the wife of Crown Prince Frederik of Denmark. However, because custom, tradition, precedent etc throughout history enables a female to take on her husband's title but not vice-versa, there has never been a title/name available or created specifically for people in the positions that Daniel Westling, Prince Henrik, Clause Von Amsberg or the Duke of Edinburgh are in.

It would seem odd (though I'm not entirely sure why) if Daniel Westling were given the title Crown Prince, because that title has always been associated with someone who is next in line to the throne. It would seem even more odd if, when Victoria becomes Queen of Sweden, Daniel becomes King of Sweden.

To my rather confused mind, the bottom line is that in reality, there is one meaning for the word KING and two meanings for the word QUEEN (royal related!). The rank and status of the title QUEEN depends on the office the bearer of such title holds.

With regard to equal primogeniture, clearly whatever system of succession is used, there will always be some kind of inequality about it. The system of monarchy (and most forms of state institutions) is by its very nature and history not one based entirely on equality. :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)
 
How about Crown Prince-Consort. (and later King-Consort.)

TRH the Crown Princess and Crown Prince-Consort of Sweden.
TM the Queen and King-Consort of Sweden.

Some online news papers already used the Kronprinsesseparet to talk about the couple.

However, I think it's just going to be
TRH the Crown Princess and Prince Daniel of Sweden, the Duchess and Duke of Västergötland. (As said by the Royal Court)
HM the Queen and HRH the Prince-Consort of Sweden.
 
Actually, there is tradition of refering to the queen regnant's husband as king. In Spain, every queen regnant's husband was king: either co-monarch (e.g. Ferdinand V and Philip I of Castile) or king consort (Isabella II's husband Francis). In England, Philip the husband of Mary I was king consort. In Scotland, another Mary I's husbands were kings consort.

Nordic countries don't have tradition to use prince consort title for the queen regnant's husband either: Margaret I reigned as widow, Christina reigned unmarried, and Ulrika Eleanor abdicated after less than a year in her husband's favour. So, nothing but the opinion that king ranks higher than queen prevents Swedish governement to decide that Daniel will be king consort - a consort with the title of king, who would rank below his wife and would do only what consorts usually do. It would be like:

Her Majesty The Queen of Sweden
His Majesty The King of Sweden
HRH The Crown Prince of Sweden (the hypothetical son of Victoria and Daniel)
HRH The Crown Princess of Sweden (the hypothetical daughter-in-law of Victoria and Daniel)
 
Somehow I think the Swedish Royals will just handle it the way the Dutch and Danish did:
the husband of the reigning Queen will get the title Prince Consort.
(like Price Henrik or Prince Claus).
 
Somehow I think the Swedish Royals will just handle it the way the Dutch and Danish did:
the husband of the reigning Queen will get the title Prince Consort.
(like Price Henrik or Prince Claus).

And Queen Elizabeth II's husband isn't called King either.

If I recall right, Prince Henrik just suddenly became The Prince Consort around 2005, so there was no automation in it. Before that, he was just referred to as "The Prince"

I think it is the case of following the modern precedent set in countries which Sweden is comparable to. Why re-invent the wheel with how Daniel is going to be addressed, when the Netherlands, Denmark and the UK have all had their heiresses being married in the generation before, and managed it without the world collapsing. (Prince Henrik's temper tantrum aside - that one had more to do with being ranked after his son in the precedence than the actual title he had.)
 
hey boys, will be happen some party or dinner to celebrating the engagement of Victoria and Daniel?
Please some one answer!
 
And Queen Elizabeth II's husband isn't called King either.

But the UK and Denmark still have male-preferance primogeniture, which is "discriminatory towards women" :)rolleyes:) so discriminating men by not giving them right to enjoy their wife's title puts things into balance. It's different in Sweden. If they want pure gender equality in the monarchy, then they shouldn't make exceptions which make no sense.
 
hey boys, will be happen some party or dinner to celebrating the engagement of Victoria and Daniel?
Please some one answer!

Here are some links with information about a little party , or shall I call it dinner, with the family on Drottningholm. Daniels parents, Ewa and Olle Westling, Daniels sister, Anna, the Kings sisters Christina and Desiree plus their families and of course Madeleine, Jonas, Carl Philipp, the King and the Queen attend this party. Emma didn't attend because of illness.

Klanen Bernadotte firade med familjen Westling inatt | Victoria gifter sig | Nyheter | Aftonbladet

Kungen höll tal för alla - Förlovningen - Expressen.se

Bara de närmaste var med på förlovningsmiddagen - Svensk Damtidning
 
Reguarding the discussion about equal primogeniture and what title a queen's husband should have... Well, I have nothing against Victoria, but I still think, that Carl Philip should have remained crown prince. And even though he only was a baby, taking his title away and giving it to his sister was very odd. But that's too late to change now, of course.

And yes, a queen's husband should be called "king", just like a king's wife is called "queen". It does give me the impression, that the title of "queen" is inferior to the title of "king", and that doesn't seem right.
 
Back
Top Bottom