The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #301  
Old 10-05-2016, 07:12 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: ***, Sweden
Posts: 1,880
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hans-Rickard View Post
The monarchy here in Sweden is not in more danger than any other monarchy in any other country.

Those "motions" from a few left wing - middle Mp:s are coming every year since many years. Nothing will happen until the 2 big parties, The Social Democrats and the Moderate Party will do something. And they have way too much to loose to even try to abolish the monarchy.

This is nothing to worry about.

What would defenitely have been the "death" of the swedish monarchy would be if the Prince's and Princesses would not be allowed to marry out of love and forced to marry another royal or even worse titular royal/nobility. That would be the most effective way to destroy the public support of the monarchy in Sweden. Anyone who says anything else can't be from Sweden because this is simply how it works here.
Exactly! Any sign or hint of a sign that they were forced to marry someone and they would be out the door sooooo quick.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #302  
Old 10-05-2016, 07:23 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 7,394
Who said anything about "forcing" them to marry someone? And practically speaking when was the last time this happened in any of the RF's?

Since when is expecting a member of any Royal family to marry someone with a non controversial background the equivalent of forcing them into a loveless marriage? It's not even a matter of requiring the partner to be an aristocrat.

You seem to be implying that the young Swedish Royals have the inability to love someone who is suitable, and if one of them had married a diplomat or an aristocrat versus say...a reality starlet...it would have been because they were "forced"? I really don't understand the reasoning these days that if a Royal is with someone of their own rank it's because they were forced into it.

But, they don't represent my country and I don't have to pay for them and call them Highness.

So if the Swedes like it, then I love it.
__________________

__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena

"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice". Martin Luther King Jr. 1929-1968
Reply With Quote
  #303  
Old 10-05-2016, 07:49 PM
Madame Verseau's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Louisville, United States
Posts: 470
Perhaps that's the reason why the Riksdag wants out in granting final consent to royal marriages - if something horrible and damaging to Sweden comes out on the consort it approved it would hurt that representative's political career? Questions raised on the approval process and how thorough was the vetting?
Reply With Quote
  #304  
Old 10-05-2016, 09:27 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 1,038
The royals are humans like all of us and no pre-programmed robots. They can also fall in love with any person on planet earth. I don't see anything wrong with that as long as they aren't serial killers or something like that.

If you fall in love with someone but is being denied to marry that person because that person doesn't have a noble background or isn't a diplomat, a military or a doctor in something, then you are forced to not marry your loved one as i see it. Most people in Sweden have no problem with Princess Sofia today and defenitely not with Queen Silvia and Prince Daniel.
Sofia did her less good choices in her youth and she admits that. Posing for a nude photo and participating in a reality tv show is controversial things that most people later regrets. But hey, it is not a crime. I don't think that should stop you from marry the love of your life. I want to see the person who has never done a controversial thing in his/her life.

We saw with Charles and the "according to the protocol suitable" Diana how things can go when you are marrying someone you were persuaded to marry and not 100 % in love with. Let that be the last example of that !
Reply With Quote
  #305  
Old 10-06-2016, 02:42 AM
xenobia's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Near the artic circle, Sweden
Posts: 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Verseau View Post
Perhaps that's the reason why the Riksdag wants out in granting final consent to royal marriages - if something horrible and damaging to Sweden comes out on the consort it approved it would hurt that representative's political career? Questions raised on the approval process and how thorough was the vetting?
What horrible thing are you talking about? I know that you don't like Sofia, but this is actually getting ridiculous.

Just the idea of av "vetting process" is totally absurd if you're a swede. No matter who would do the vetting.
Reply With Quote
  #306  
Old 10-06-2016, 06:20 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: ***, Sweden
Posts: 1,880
Quote:
Originally Posted by xenobia View Post
What horrible thing are you talking about? I know that you don't like Sofia, but this is actually getting ridiculous.

Just the idea of av "vetting process" is totally absurd if you're a swede. No matter who would do the vetting.
Haha, exactly! Vetting for a job, ok. But vetting for marriage is absurd. I think people can accept the vetting of the royal a smidge because of the role, but only for actually bad stuff like criminality and such. Not a stupid picture in your youth or you having too little fancy blood in your veins.
Reply With Quote
  #307  
Old 10-06-2016, 06:21 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: ***, Sweden
Posts: 1,880
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hans-Rickard View Post
The royals are humans like all of us and no pre-programmed robots. They can also fall in love with any person on planet earth. I don't see anything wrong with that as long as they aren't serial killers or something like that.

If you fall in love with someone but is being denied to marry that person because that person doesn't have a noble background or isn't a diplomat, a military or a doctor in something, then you are forced to not marry your loved one as i see it. Most people in Sweden have no problem with Princess Sofia today and defenitely not with Queen Silvia and Prince Daniel.
Sofia did her less good choices in her youth and she admits that. Posing for a nude photo and participating in a reality tv show is controversial things that most people later regrets. But hey, it is not a crime. I don't think that should stop you from marry the love of your life. I want to see the person who has never done a controversial thing in his/her life.

We saw with Charles and the "according to the protocol suitable" Diana how things can go when you are marrying someone you were persuaded to marry and not 100 % in love with. Let that be the last example of that !
Exactly what I mean!
Reply With Quote
  #308  
Old 10-06-2016, 06:43 AM
Duke of Marmalade's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
TRF Author
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Posts: 12,504
I don't think there is a problem unless the one that matters isn't obviously qualified to do the job. In this case, this is Victoria, I don't think that a majority of the Swedes has this feeling.
While Prince Daniel hasn't put a foot wrong and adds to the satisfying picture of the future King family, he is not really important. He has always been a decent human being, leaving the limelight to Victoria, so that's good enough.

Sofia is even less important and to be honest in a time where the difference between royals and celebrities can be hard to tell, it's not bad to have a family member that, while of no institutional importance, draws the pink press.

I'd like to add that if CP had been the heir, there would have been much more opposition for him to marry Sofia. She's not in the same league as Daniel. But we've been there before.
Reply With Quote
  #309  
Old 10-06-2016, 07:01 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 7,145
For so far all the talk about love marriages and free partner choices et al. Nice. But I would ask everyone to look up to the header: the royal forums.

Note that any successor to the throne was free to marry anyone. Yes, before King Carl XVI Gustaf this had consequences when it was not approved by the King. For several royals this was no hindrance to marry the partner of their choice anyway. Being royal comes with vast privileges. And, oh yes... it came with obligations. For an example the desire that an alliance should not only procreate the royal dynasty but also benefit the status, the dignity and the prestige of said dynasty.

I liked that clarity. Marry the milkmaid if you want. But you will loose the royal status. Now any milkmaid can become Queen of Sweden, by way of speaking. This has taken a very deep essence of a royal family away.

The first Bernadotte King was not at all that highborn. He knew that. The strict marriage policy introduced was exactly to push the Bernadottes up in prestige. That his descendants married Princess Louise of the Netherlands, Princess Sophia of Nassau, Princess Therese of Saxen, King Frederik VIII of Denmark, Princess Victoria of Baden, Princess Ingeborg of Denmark, etc. was not for nothing. In no time the Bernadottes became an utmost respected royal dynasty.

Note that Prince Oscar, Prince Sigvard, Prince Carl Johan and Prince Lennart all could marry the partner of their choice. Yes, it had consequences, but that is a fair part of the deal to be born with three golden spoons in the mouth and living up in guilded cages.
Reply With Quote
  #310  
Old 10-06-2016, 07:10 AM
maria-olivia's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Posts: 4,418
They married scandinavian or german Princesses.
The Wedding of Astrid of Sweden with the future King of Belgium was a Changement and kissing her fiancé at her arrival in Antwerpen was something unexpected!

Due to Valentin's Royal Blog King Baudouin said that the relationship between the 2 Royal houses was broken for years abd due to Queen Fabiola they started again.
No show up for King Leopold III at all the Scandinavian Royal Events between 1935 and 1940.
Reply With Quote
  #311  
Old 10-06-2016, 07:30 AM
xenobia's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Near the artic circle, Sweden
Posts: 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade View Post
I don't think there is a problem unless the one that matters isn't obviously qualified to do the job. In this case, this is Victoria, I don't think that a majority of the Swedes has this feeling.
While Prince Daniel hasn't put a foot wrong and adds to the satisfying picture of the future King family, he is not really important. He has always been a decent human being, leaving the limelight to Victoria, so that's good enough.

Sofia is even less important and to be honest in a time where the difference between royals and celebrities can be hard to tell, it's not bad to have a family member that, while of no institutional importance, draws the pink press.

I'd like to add that if CP had been the heir, there would have been much more opposition for him to marry Sofia. She's not in the same league as Daniel. But we've been there before.
I really don't understand the reasoning behind this post.

The topic is the future of the swedish monarchy. This is, in some extent, connected to the topic who the members of the royal family marries. Silvia is the perfect example here. I honestly doubt that the monarchy would have thrived the way it did if she hadn't been a major part of the family.

But there are no specific qualifications that can determine if a new royal (one that marries into a royal family) will succeed with his or her new job. There are lots of factors, but they are all very dependent on a specific moment in time and/or a nations traditions, values and perceptions of the new royal.

The king is king. But the queen is, IMO, the one who saved the monarchy, even though she was born as a commoner. I have no doubt that Daniel will continue to be a rock in Victorias life, just as he will be a rock in the royal family when she one day becomes queen. Having said that, I don't think that the majority of the population saw that coming when the news of Victorias new boyfriend (him) broke almost 15 years ago. But he proved himself, and people respect that here. You do get a chance. Use it well, and the swedish people in general won't care if you have a masters degree or just barely finished high school, what job you had before, where you were born... and so on. Silvia and Daniel proves this. There is no reason why Sofia should be any different to them in the long run. She hasn't put her foot wrong since the engagement, as far as I can tell.

People here like the idea that the royal princes and princesses can marry who they want to. If they are gym owners, yoga instructors, foreign bankers or a divorced ex model (like Lillian) - that's not an issue. What matters is what you do with your life once you enter the royal family. So phrases like "she's not in the same league as x" is really a very strange way of thinking for me as a swede.

I totally get that this isn't the way things work in other royal families, or in other countries. People are different. Not better or worse, just different. And this is how it works here.
Reply With Quote
  #312  
Old 10-06-2016, 08:00 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 2,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by xenobia View Post
What horrible thing are you talking about? I know that you don't like Sofia, but this is actually getting ridiculous.

Just the idea of av "vetting process" is totally absurd if you're a swede. No matter who would do the vetting.
Whether it is absurd or not, it is nonetheless the law of the land in Sweden. In other words, when the law says that princes and princesses of the Royal House cannot retain their succession rights if they marry without the consent of the government granted upon request by the King, it is clear to me at least that the intention of the legislature was that royal brides or grooms should be vetted.

Daniel and Sofia were therefore vetted and found suitable for public service and raising future potential heirs to the throne, Given that both Daniel and Sofia have so far performed adequately in their public role, i believe the government's judgment when they consented to their marriages was correct in hindsight.

Broadly speaking, I don't think there should be a rule that royals must not marry foreigners, or aristocrats, or other royals. In fact, if such rule existed, it would be as bad as the old rule that royals could only marry other foreign royals. It is important though that royal consorts, whether they are commoner, noble or royal, domestic or foreign, be suitable people for the role they will perform, and that is why I think the government vetting is necessary and should continue to be part of the law.
Reply With Quote
  #313  
Old 10-06-2016, 08:54 AM
xenobia's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Near the artic circle, Sweden
Posts: 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
Whether it is absurd or not, it is nonetheless the law of the land in Sweden. In other words, when the law says that princes and princesses of the Royal House cannot retain their succession rights if they marry without the consent of the government granted upon request by the King, it is clear to me at least that the intention of the legislature was that royal brides or grooms should be vetted.

Daniel and Sofia were therefore vetted and found suitable for public service and raising future potential heirs to the throne, Given that both Daniel and Sofia have so far performed adequately in their public role, i believe the government's judgment when they consented to their marriages was correct in hindsight.

Broadly speaking, I don't think there should be a rule that royals must not marry foreigners, or aristocrats, or other royals. In fact, if such rule existed, it would be as bad as the old rule that royals could only marry other foreign royals. It is important though that royal consorts, whether they are commoner, noble or royal, domestic or foreign, be suitable people for the role they will perform, and that is why I think the government vetting is necessary and should continue to be part of the law.
My comment was a respons to: "Perhaps that's the reason why the Riksdag wants out in granting final consent to royal marriages - if something horrible and damaging to Sweden comes out on the consort it approved it would hurt that representative's political career? Questions raised on the approval process and how thorough was the vetting?"

Yes. The kings children need the formal approval of the parliament to be allowed to marry into the family. That's correct. To the best of my knowledge, this is also just an old symbolic tradition - just like the inspection of newborn royal babies. No one seriously thinks that a royal child these days would be switched at birth (or something like that). It's just a tradition. The same goes for the formal approval of a royal marriage. I have no doubt that all the partners of the royal children are thoroughly screened from a security point as soon as they start dating - it would be irresponsible to let a security risk have access to the royal family. But there is no "vetting process", if you mean that the prime minister and his cabinet sit down to have discussions about if Daniel, Sofia and Chris are suitable to marry their (now) spouses.
Reply With Quote
  #314  
Old 10-06-2016, 12:20 PM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 7,145
The argument that marrying commoners would benefit the royal family because it would 'bring the monarchy closer to the people' seems countered by the lower and lower approval ratings in various European monarchies which wanted 'to modernize'. But there are also arguments which say that people are not waiting at all on "common royals", being like you and me. After all, when that point has been reached: why keeping a monarchy at all?

Would the monarchy really be less popular in Sweden when the King would not have married Silvia Sommerlath but a contemporary royal like Princess Margriet of the Netherlands, Princess Alexandra of Hannover, Donata Duchess of Mecklenburg, etc?

So a Queen Margriet (Margareta) of Sweden next to King Carl XVI Gustaf on a State Visit in Germany, would be less popular than a Silvia, because she was born in a royal family? Pffft... I think it would not have made any difference but at least the royal family would have kept their core existence and the necessary distance indeed.

It is as with supporting a football team. There is no real rationale to do so but it is a feeling. When supporters realize that their heroes in that team, often a foreign legion of millionaires, have nothing to do at all with their club, it is just their "job", the magic disappears.

There is no rationale to be a royalist. It is their magic and splendour. Their so completely different class and world. But when this all disappears, also the magic is gone. Once I was such a royalist but when there would be a referendum today, I would not give my guarantee that I would vote for a continuation. I am sorry.
Reply With Quote
  #315  
Old 10-06-2016, 01:26 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: ***, Sweden
Posts: 1,880
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
The argument that marrying commoners would benefit the royal family because it would 'bring the monarchy closer to the people' seems countered by the lower and lower approval ratings in various European monarchies which wanted 'to modernize'. But there are also arguments which say that people are not waiting at all on "common royals", being like you and me. After all, when that point has been reached: why keeping a monarchy at all?

Would the monarchy really be less popular in Sweden when the King would not have married Silvia Sommerlath but a contemporary royal like Princess Margriet of the Netherlands, Princess Alexandra of Hannover, Donata Duchess of Mecklenburg, etc?

So a Queen Margriet (Margareta) of Sweden next to King Carl XVI Gustaf on a State Visit in Germany, would be less popular than a Silvia, because she was born in a royal family? Pffft... I think it would not have made any difference but at least the royal family would have kept their core existence and the necessary distance indeed.

It is as with supporting a football team. There is no real rationale to do so but it is a feeling. When supporters realize that their heroes in that team, often a foreign legion of millionaires, have nothing to do at all with their club, it is just their "job", the magic disappears.

There is no rationale to be a royalist. It is their magic and splendour. Their so completely different class and world. But when this all disappears, also the magic is gone. Once I was such a royalist but when there would be a referendum today, I would not give my guarantee that I would vote for a continuation. I am sorry.
We are not saying a noble person would not be just as liked. Just that they would not be better. Just just as good.
Reply With Quote
  #316  
Old 10-06-2016, 01:31 PM
Lee-Z's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Heerlen, Netherlands
Posts: 2,433
Imo, in North-West europe at least, the hierarchical structures in society of a century ago have changed, especially after the 2nd WW and the 60's and 70's.
People who were traditionally regarded as infallible and "should not be argued with", like a mayor, clergyman, doctor etc, are not regarded as such anymore. In the NL it's completely normal to question and argue with people in these positions and i can imagine it to be a bit alike in a couple of countries.

People in these jobs have had to adjust to this and adjust to modern times. If they choose to be elitist and stick to the opinion that they are above others, they are nowadays not accepted anymore...
Imo this also goes for the royal family, they also have to adjust to modern times. Royal culture of the 19th century will never return...

Imo this can happen with or without "non royals" marrying into a royal family, but in several cases it seems to be easier to adjust if there are actually commoners among the royal ranks.

eta: funnily enough i don't think i ever heard the "commoner" argument in the nl against the monarchy. Arguments to abolish usually are more like:
- they cost/spend a lot of money (very popular argument for the dutch)
- inheriting a job by birth is not modern
- they are not dutch at all (W-A has little dutch blood, Amalia even less)
i wonder if it's similar in Sweden...
__________________
Wisdom begins in wonder - Socrates
Reply With Quote
  #317  
Old 10-06-2016, 02:40 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 2,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
The argument that marrying commoners would benefit the royal family because it would 'bring the monarchy closer to the people' seems countered by the lower and lower approval ratings in various European monarchies which wanted 'to modernize'. But there are also arguments which say that people are not waiting at all on "common royals", being like you and me. After all, when that point has been reached: why keeping a monarchy at all?

Would the monarchy really be less popular in Sweden when the King would not have married Silvia Sommerlath but a contemporary royal like Princess Margriet of the Netherlands, Princess Alexandra of Hannover, Donata Duchess of Mecklenburg, etc?

So a Queen Margriet (Margareta) of Sweden next to King Carl XVI Gustaf on a State Visit in Germany, would be less popular than a Silvia, because she was born in a royal family? Pffft... I think it would not have made any difference but at least the royal family would have kept their core existence and the necessary distance indeed.

It is as with supporting a football team. There is no real rationale to do so but it is a feeling. When supporters realize that their heroes in that team, often a foreign legion of millionaires, have nothing to do at all with their club, it is just their "job", the magic disappears.

There is no rationale to be a royalist. It is their magic and splendour. Their so completely different class and world. But when this all disappears, also the magic is gone. Once I was such a royalist but when there would be a referendum today, I would not give my guarantee that I would vote for a continuation. I am sorry.
I agree that a foreign royal bride would not be necessarily less popular than the current crop of "commoner" royal consorts. In fact, as I wrote in another forum (and was contradicted by a British poster who disagreed with me), I personally believe, that if Princess Madeleine for example had married Prince William, she would have been at least as popular in the UK as Duchess of Cambridge as Kate Middleton is now and, maybe, could have been even more popular as Madeleine would be better prepared for the job than Kate was when she joined the royal family. But that is just speculation on my part based on a hypothetical alternate reality.

In the end, I also agree with Lee-Z that the strongest argument against the monarchy still is that the office of Head of State should not be a family monopoly inherited by birth. The strongest argument, on the other hand, in favor of keeping the monarchy, in addition to historic continuity, is that a hereditary monarch can keep a level of political neutrality that no elected president could possibly have. In that sense, a hereditary monarch is much better suited for the ceremonial representation of the State and even for speaking up on humanitarian causes without the risk of confusing them with divisive partisan politics.
Reply With Quote
  #318  
Old 10-06-2016, 03:27 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: ***, Sweden
Posts: 1,880
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee-Z View Post
Imo, in North-West europe at least, the hierarchical structures in society of a century ago have changed, especially after the 2nd WW and the 60's and 70's.
People who were traditionally regarded as infallible and "should not be argued with", like a mayor, clergyman, doctor etc, are not regarded as such anymore. In the NL it's completely normal to question and argue with people in these positions and i can imagine it to be a bit alike in a couple of countries.

People in these jobs have had to adjust to this and adjust to modern times. If they choose to be elitist and stick to the opinion that they are above others, they are nowadays not accepted anymore...
Imo this also goes for the royal family, they also have to adjust to modern times. Royal culture of the 19th century will never return...

Imo this can happen with or without "non royals" marrying into a royal family, but in several cases it seems to be easier to adjust if there are actually commoners among the royal ranks.

eta: funnily enough i don't think i ever heard the "commoner" argument in the nl against the monarchy. Arguments to abolish usually are more like:
- they cost/spend a lot of money (very popular argument for the dutch)
- inheriting a job by birth is not modern
- they are not dutch at all (W-A has little dutch blood, Amalia even less)
i wonder if it's similar in Sweden...
THose are the exact reasons I've heard for a republic as well. I have not hear one person thinking "why should we pay them they are just like us", except for a "they are nothing special, why are they royalty and not me" kind of argument that they would use if CG was inbred with 100% Gustav Vasa blood.
Reply With Quote
  #319  
Old 12-23-2016, 10:28 AM
LadyFinn's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southwest, Finland
Posts: 24,789
At Aftonbladet TV's royal program "Kungligt med Jenny Alexandersson", they tell about a new research. Aftonbladet gave Inizio a job to make a poll about questions regarding the royal family.

1. Who do you like most at the royal family?
Results:
Crown princess Victoria 42 %
King Carl Gustaf 12 %
Prince Daniel 7 %
Prince Carl Philip 6 %
Princess Sofia 4 %
Princess Madeleine 4 %
Queen Silvia 2 %
Christopher O'Neill 1 %
None of them 18 %
Hesitant, don't know 4 %

2. Should the king abdicate?
Results
40 % answered that the king should stay as the king
34 % thinks that the king should abdicate
26 % don't know

3. Should Carl Philip and Madeleine still get apanage?
Results
34 % thinks that Carl Philip should get apanage
24 % thinks that Madeleine should get apanage
48 % thinks that neither of them should get apanage
17 % don't know
(there is something odd at the percentages)

1010 persons, 18 years old or older were interviewed between 5th November-5th December.
Hon är populärast i kungafamiljen _ Svensk Damtidning
Reply With Quote
  #320  
Old 12-23-2016, 10:31 AM
Marty91charmed's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Near Verona and Venice, Italy
Posts: 6,063
The poll has surprising results about the popularity of the king who ranked as second and about the view on his abdication...
__________________

__________________
"Yet, walking free upon her own estate
Still,in her solitude, she is the Queen".
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
king carl xvi gustav, sweden


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Future of the Spanish Monarchy TODOI Royal Family of Spain 1341 11-11-2017 06:03 PM
The Monarchy in Greece Fireweaver The Royal Family of Greece 309 10-31-2016 06:54 PM
Popularity of the Royal Family in Norway Mandy Royal House of Norway 127 07-14-2014 11:34 PM
The Monarchy And The Media Alexandria Royal House of Norway 12 04-08-2004 05:06 PM




Popular Tags
albania best outfit birthday carl gustaf chris o'neill crown princess mary crown princess victoria current events denmark earl of snowdon fashion poll general news hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume hereditary princess sophie infanta cristina infanta elena infanta leonor infanta sofia iñaki iñaki urdangarín james bond king felipe king felipe vi king philippe king willem-alexander letizia liechtenstein monarchy news picture of the week prince alexander prince carl philip prince daniel prince felix prince gabriel prince harry prince jean prince nicholas prince oscar princess beatrice princess claire of luxembourg princess estelle princess leonore princess madeleine princess mary fashion princess of asturias princess sofia princess victoria queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen mathilde queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen silvia rohans state visit state visit from argentina stephanie sweden swedish royal family victoria



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:24 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017
Jelsoft Enterprises