The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #461  
Old 07-18-2015, 07:06 PM
Archduchess Zelia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 2,729
I'd agree with Meraude and say that there's a great chance they wouldn't have met had Carl Philip been the Crown Prince. However, had they met, I don't think it's at all unlikely that they would have ended up marrying – especially not with the King's alleged favouritism of CP. And that's fine, I think (that he could have married her, that is, favouritism is never fine). Royal or not, you should be allowed to spend your life with who you want to spend your life with.
__________________

__________________
"Hope is like the sun. If you only believe it when you see it you'll never make it through the night."
Our Princess

Reply With Quote
  #462  
Old 07-18-2015, 07:08 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,091
I think if CP had remained THE CP then no it's unlikely he would of ever met or even considered marrying Sofia. His life would of had a very different trajectory.


LaRae
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #463  
Old 07-18-2015, 07:45 PM
Queen Claude's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 1,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Verseau View Post
One change that would have taken place if Carl Philip were crown prince: Sofia would not be a Bernadotte now. It's one thing to marry the third in line to the throne; it's another when the new royal bride is the future queen. The standards would be higher for the wife of a sovereign; and with Sofia's past it would be difficult for Carl Gustaf and the Riksdag to approve of the marriage. Of course there's the case of Mette-Marit of Norway; but the Norwegian Royal Family dealt with her past head on. Before their wedding MM spoke before Norwegians, addressed her past, admitted regret, and asked the people to give her a chance. From what I've seen, it worked, unless things drastically changed over the years. (I don't follow the NRF). The SRF didn't take that approach with Sofia, but I believe the game plan would have been different if Carl Philip were heir apparent.
I am not 100% sure but I don't think that the Norwegian Royal Family confronted Mette-Marit's past head on, or at least not preemptively. Mette-Marit, with Haakon by her side, gave an emotional interview a few days before her wedding where she said she regretted her past. The majority of Norwegians either supported the relationship/marriage or were indifferent but those who did not were apparently very vocal, many of whom raised security concerns. It seemed like Crown Prince Haakon was going to marry her even if it meant removing himself from the line of succession but it did seem like they they were going to make an effort to address to opposition and not incur the upheaval that would undoubtedly have happened if Haakon removed himself from the line of succession. While there were people who oppose Sofia, the opposition was not as intense as it was with Mette-Marit and therefore there was no need for her to don a hair shirt over her past.

I think it boils down to the will of the people, what one nation approves does not necessarily mean that another nation will approve those same circumstances/conditions. Having said that, side by side, IMO Mette-Marit was a harder sell than Sofia. Mette-Marit's ex, and more importantly the father of her child, had been convicted of possession of a significant amount of cocaine during the same timeframe that Mette-Marit's relationship with the Crown Prince was getting serious and she was seen as a potential Crown Princess and ultimately Queen.
Reply With Quote
  #464  
Old 07-18-2015, 08:29 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,262
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hans-Rickard View Post
Don't think there would have been any difference. The King was Crown Prince from the age of 4 and until he became King, his private life (with the exception of the heavier workload and more prominent representation duties) did not differ alot from how Carl Philip is living today. So yes i do belive that we would have had a Crown Princess Sofia today had that been the case.

That change in 1980 was in my opinion an extremly lucky change for the survival of the swedish monarchy, no matter what the King and Queen thinks about it.
Which begs the question: is primogeniture the best way to decide who the heir is , or is it better to do as in many Islamic monarchies where the King picks his successor or some lkind of election is held within the family ? I started a thread about that in the Royalty Present, Past, and Future Forums.
Reply With Quote
  #465  
Old 07-18-2015, 08:50 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: -, Antarctica
Posts: 1,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hans-Rickard View Post
Don't think there would have been any difference. The King was Crown Prince from the age of 4 and until he became King, his private life (with the exception of the heavier workload and more prominent representation duties) did not differ alot from how Carl Philip is living today. So yes i do belive that we would have had a Crown Princess Sofia today had that been the case.
So you think that if Carl Philip had been crown prince he would have chosen to study design and drive race cars as he does today? I doubt that would been a part of his life as a crown prince. His education would have been similar to Victoria's and there would have been other women for him to date, maybe there's a "Silvia" somewhere he never met for not being the crown prince?
Reply With Quote
  #466  
Old 07-18-2015, 09:41 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,971
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
Which begs the question: is primogeniture the best way to decide who the heir is , or is it better to do as in many Islamic monarchies where the King picks his successor or some kind of election is held within the family ? I started a thread about that in the Royalty Present, Past, and Future Forums.
But if you're going to move away from primogeniture for selection of your Head of State, and move to a system where the current Head of State picks his successor, or where there is some kind of election within the ruling family, why not go the whole hog and have the Head of State selected by election by the whole adult population? Why should the Head of State only be able to be selected from the members of one privileged family?

That was a rhetorical question. I am not seeking to start a discussion about whether Sweden should republic, merely to point out that if you are going to move from primogeniture to some form of election process, wider-reaching questions of election arise.
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #467  
Old 07-18-2015, 10:07 PM
Archduchess Zelia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 2,729
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meraude View Post
So you think that if Carl Philip had been crown prince he would have chosen to study design and drive race cars as he does today? I doubt that would been a part of his life as a crown prince. His education would have been similar to Victoria's and there would have been other women for him to date, maybe there's a "Silvia" somewhere he never met for not being the crown prince?
He could, and probably would, still be driving race cars. It's not impossible per se for heirs to abandon their hobbies completely – our Frederik still sails and is a keen sportsman. I actually reckon that CP would be much like Frederik had he been Crown Prince. As for other women to date – sure, there have been other women regardless – only he met and fell in love with Sofia and chose her. I don't see why that shouldn't have been possible had he been the Crown Prince?
__________________
"Hope is like the sun. If you only believe it when you see it you'll never make it through the night."
Our Princess

Reply With Quote
  #468  
Old 07-19-2015, 02:43 AM
LadyFinn's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southwest, Finland
Posts: 30,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meraude View Post
So you think that if Carl Philip had been crown prince he would have chosen to study design and drive race cars as he does today? I doubt that would been a part of his life as a crown prince. His education would have been similar to Victoria's and there would have been other women for him to date, maybe there's a "Silvia" somewhere he never met for not being the crown prince?
I agree. If Carl Philip would have been the crown prince, would he have had time to compete in racing, and on the other hand, car racing is seen as a rather dangerous sport, so it may well have been that it would have been forbidden for a crown prince to race.
Reply With Quote
  #469  
Old 07-19-2015, 08:05 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: -, Antarctica
Posts: 1,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archduchess Zelia View Post
As for other women to date – sure, there have been other women regardless – only he met and fell in love with Sofia and chose her. I don't see why that shouldn't have been possible had he been the Crown Prince?
And if he was already engaged or married if he happened to met Sofia? Even if being single then, it's not certain he would have considered a marriage with her, as I think that a person's personality is to a degree shaped by their upbringing. He would not have been exactly the same person as he is today if he had been a crown prince.
Reply With Quote
  #470  
Old 09-01-2020, 06:35 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 2,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prinsara View Post
I would be very interested to hear, more relevant thread or not, what CG was planning on doing if he never had a son.
If the King never had a son, he would have favored his oldest daughter to be queen, and in the same vein I suppose that if he never had children he would have favored one of his sisters to be queen.

The Office of the Marshal of the Realm, i.e. the Royal Court, formally recommended to Parliament in 1977 that it change the Act of Succession to the same system used in Denmark, the Netherlands, and Great Britain. At the time, these three countries allowed a woman to be queen if and only if she had no brothers.

I think it is safe to say that the recommendation of the Royal Court is the recommendation of the King.

Note that in its recommendation, the Office supports introducing equal primogeniture if introducing the Danish/Dutch/British system is unfeasible, but it strongly recommends implementing it for future descendants only and allowing the King's potential future oldest son if born before the change to become king, bypassing Victoria.

Refer to the Riksmarskalksämbetet's comments on page 29 and 15.

om kvinnlig tronföljd Proposition 1977/78:71 - Riksdagen


Quote:
Originally Posted by JR76 View Post
Agreed. Mistress of the robes, Countess Alice Trolle-Wachtmeister told in an interview around the time of Estelles birth how she and other courtiers was hoping for a boy when the Queen was pregnant for the first time because the Court and the Royal family was aware that a change of law of succession was coming and that the first born child would be the heir to the throne. She also told how gutted and disappointed she felt when it turned out to be a girl but also how she had changed her mind and that Victoria would be a great monarch when it was her turn.
That said, Princess Birgitta in an interview a few months ago told about how she was with the King when he got the message of how the government had decided regarding the succession and his heir and how sad and disappointed he was. Apparently he had still harboured hopes that the changes wouldn't affect his children.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app
Would you happen to have a link to these interviews?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
Besides, Victoria, who is the heir to the throne, was allowed to marry Daniel, who might not have a "a past" in Mette-Marit's or Sofia's sense, but was nonetheless an unsuitable consort for a future queen.

Having said that, we should not forget that getting the King's consent to get married was not an easy task either for Victoria or for CP, and that it actually took a long time before they could get engaged respectively to Daniel and Sofia.
That was reportedly the case for the Crown Princess, if the rumors are to be believed, but not for Prince Carl Philip. Sofia Hellqvist was permitted to participate in family and even official events at a much earlier stage than Daniel Westling.

Personally, I have trouble understanding why Mr. Westling should have been considered unsuitable. The King himself married a commoner, and Princess Lilian, who was fully accepted by the King and the public, was of a working-class family background.
Reply With Quote
  #471  
Old 09-01-2020, 09:41 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: The 6ix, Canada
Posts: 346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
If the King never had a son, he would have favored his oldest daughter to be queen, and in the same vein I suppose that if he never had children he would have favored one of his sisters to be queen.

The Office of the Marshal of the Realm, i.e. the Royal Court, formally recommended to Parliament in 1977 that it change the Act of Succession to the same system used in Denmark, the Netherlands, and Great Britain. At the time, these three countries allowed a woman to be queen if and only if she had no brothers.

I think it is safe to say that the recommendation of the Royal Court is the recommendation of the King.

Note that in its recommendation, the Office supports introducing equal primogeniture if introducing the Danish/Dutch/British system is unfeasible, but it strongly recommends implementing it for future descendants only and allowing the King's potential future oldest son if born before the change to become king, bypassing Victoria.

Refer to the Riksmarskalksämbetet's comments on page 29 and 15.

om kvinnlig tronföljd Proposition 1977/78:71 - Riksdagen
That's actually vastly less entertaining than I was hoping for, alas. The king is still conservative and sexist, but perhaps it illustrates why one should not pick "For Sweden, with the times" if one is not prepared to agree with Sweden what those times are.

Quote:
That was reportedly the case for the Crown Princess, if the rumors are to be believed, but not for Prince Carl Philip. Sofia Hellqvist was permitted to participate in family and even official events at a much earlier stage than Daniel Westling.

Personally, I have trouble understanding why Mr. Westling should have been considered unsuitable. The King himself married a commoner, and Princess Lilian, who was fully accepted by the King and the public, was of a working-class family background.
Well, Lilian had to wait thirty years. :) I think she was then considered acceptable, at that point.

General sexism (not just CG's) dictates that because men are more important, future-queen's consort must be more impressive than "prince's wife" (which is a transformative honor in itself). They wanted Victoria to get what they thought she needed; Carl Philip to have what he wanted. Hoping for a more educated/wealthier man then backfired with Madeleine; unfaithful first fiancé, and husband wanting nothing to do with being royal.
Reply With Quote
  #472  
Old 09-01-2020, 11:01 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: tacoma, United States
Posts: 82
Hello everyone,It is really sad that after 7years of being married and 2 beautiful children,some people still pick on her, Sofia. Since she became a Pss of Sweden, she had done nothing wrong. Only non Swedes,have bashed her and CP. Not much has changed has it. If someone is not liked let them have it. I would like some of you to read the post's before their marriage,seven years later lot of the comments would be called,dare I say it racist. Look deep into yourself and let everyone know if this behavior of the posters on this or any Forum would have been tolerated by you, if it would have been your daughter? or yourself?. It took me 12 years to join,but some of the comments are still the same. Time change but it seems some people do not.
Reply With Quote
  #473  
Old 09-01-2020, 11:24 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,262
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prinsara View Post
That's actually vastly less entertaining than I was hoping for, alas. The king is still conservative and sexist, but perhaps it illustrates why one should not pick "For Sweden, with the times" if one is not prepared to agree with Sweden what those times are.



Well, Lilian had to wait thirty years. :) I think she was then considered acceptable, at that point.

General sexism (not just CG's) dictates that because men are more important, future-queen's consort must be more impressive than "prince's wife" (which is a tranformative honor in itself). They wanted Victoria to get what they thought she needed; Carl Philip to have what he wanted. Hoping for a more educated/wealthier man then backfired with Madeleine; unfaithful first fiancé, and husband wanting nothing to do with being royal.
I don’t think your argument makes sense. If they wanted Victoria to have a “ more impressive husband” , they would have forced her to marry a foreign prince from an old sovereign family ( either reigning or non-reigning ),. Several years of courtship didn’t make Daniel “ more impressive” on paper IMHO.

I also think that, if Carl Philip were the Crown Prince, he might not have married someone like Sofia. His marriage was “ easier” to consent to, if that is what you are arguing, not so much because he is a man who should always get what he wants , but precisely because his marriage was less consenquential to the State as neither he nor his future children would probably ascend the throne.

I also think you should be more respectful of other cultures. Many people support male-preference primogeniture not because they are sexist , but rather because they are traditionalists who would rather see the Crown kept in the same ( patrilineal ) family rather than starting a new dynasty.
Reply With Quote
  #474  
Old 09-01-2020, 11:33 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 2,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverpot View Post
I didn't find any valid quotes among those answers. There's one poster asserting that the King said something in an interview with Swedish television, but I can't find that.

Besides, the press would have had a field day with this if he'd actually said anything like this. And why do I not remember it?
The press did have "a field day" at the time. I will emphasize the valid quotes in bold facing so that they are easier to find:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Binny View Post
Swedish king says his son, not daughter, should take over throne
Mon Nov 24

STOCKHOLM (AFP) - Twenty-three years have passed since Sweden adopted a new Succession Act, but King Carl Gustaf XVI is still upset that his eldest child, Princess Victoria, and not his only son will become Sweden's next monarch.

[...]

Asked by Swedish television whether he still believed the change was wrong, he said:

"Of course. It's simple. A constitutional law that works retroactively, that's odd," he said.

A spokesman for the royal family, Elisabeth Tarras-Wahlberg, stressed that the king was however very pleased with the way Victoria was carrying out her duties as crown princess.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hrhcp View Post
http://pub.tv2.no/nettavisen/english/article158322.ece

NEWS IN ENGLISH
SWEDEN:
Victoria's father does not want her as queen

Tilrettelagt av Carin Pettersson 25.11.03 10:59

It is 23 years since the constitution was changed, but Carl XVI Gustav of Sweden is still not comfortable with the law change that makes his oldest daughter the next regent of Sweden.

“It’s strange,” said Carl Gustav in an interview on Swedish television Sunday.

[...]

“I think it’s simple, a constitution that works in retroactive force is strange.”

The King of Sweden has always been against the law change. In 1980 Carl Gustav said the following, according to the paper Vestmanland:

“I would prefer that my son Carl Philip is my successor, and I’m sure that the majority of the Swedish people would prefer to have a king on the throne.”

The Swedish court was Monday very specific when it stressed that the Kings comments do not mean that he is displeased with Crown Princess Victoria or the job she does.

The statements from the King were not at all appreciated by Swedish politicians. Gudrun Schyman, the Liberal Parties former leader, said the King’s statements is another argument to why Sweden should abolish the monarchy, and she said that she thinks it is horrible if the King questions a democratic decision.
Note that these articles were not written by TRF posters, but are from AFP (Agence France-Presse) and TV2, both of which are established press organizations.

Below are links to Aftonbladet articles on the 2003 interview, if you prefer to search for the quotes in Swedish.

Kungen: Grundlagen är lustig | Aftonbladet
Du har fel, kungen! | Aftonbladet
Reply With Quote
  #475  
Old 09-01-2020, 11:46 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Bellevue, United States
Posts: 1,315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
I also think you should be more respectful of other cultures. Many people support male-preference primogeniture not because they are sexist , but rather because they are traditionalists who would rather see the Crown kept in the same ( patrilineal ) family rather than starting a new dynasty.
But the belief that daughters and their children are not part of the same family or dynasty is sexist.
Reply With Quote
  #476  
Old 09-01-2020, 02:09 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: The 6ix, Canada
Posts: 346
CG literally speaking for himself in 1975 (at 1:59). While it's obviously not on the succession change, I feel it's illustrative of the way he ended up reacting.
Reply With Quote
  #477  
Old 09-01-2020, 02:22 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: The 6ix, Canada
Posts: 346
Not quite sure exactly which culture I'm disrespecting... Sweden had female succession before they decided to get rid of it, and allowing women at all means the chance of a woman succeeding, and thus those seemingly-dreaded dynastic issues.
Reply With Quote
  #478  
Old 09-01-2020, 03:02 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,262
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawin View Post
But the belief that daughters and their children are not part of the same family or dynasty is sexist.

Families have to be defined somehow so that we can distinguish who belongs to each of them or not. The simplest and most straightforward definition is that one is a member of a given family when he or she uses the family's name. And the traditional naming convention, which had been observed in Europe for centuries, was that family names were transmitted in paternal line. So it was perfectly reasonable at the time when male preference primogeniture was instituted to assume that it was also a way to keep the Crown, as far as possible, within the same family, but without the risk of the Crown falling into the hands of very distant relatives of the last King as was common in countries that used strict agnatic succession.


It was only relatively recently that some European countries like Belgium, Sweden, or maybe the Netherlands began to allow parents to "choose" which family their children will belong to by adopting either their paternal or maternal family name. And, of course, some royal houses like the Orange-Nassau have simply ignored naming conventions altogether and kept their dynastic name even in maternal line. But all that has led to quite a lot of confusion and instability, not so much in the succession to the Crown, but in the succession in the nobility, especially in countries like Belgium, the Netherlands or Sweden where nobility is intrinsically attached to a patrilineal family name. In other coutries with a peerage-like system like the UK or Spain, where nobility is personally attached only to the holder of a title and not to a family name, the impact of children taking their maternal family name would be presumably less consequential.



In Sweden, Daniel changed his last name to Bernadotte so that, whereas Estelle and Oscar themselves (and probably Estelle's children after them) do not use a family name, Oscar's children will probably be Bernadottes too and, in any case, the Royal House will continue to be called Bernadotte. It remains to be seen what will happen in Belgium and especially in Spain.
Reply With Quote
  #479  
Old 09-01-2020, 03:06 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 2,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
If the King never had a son, he would have favored his oldest daughter to be queen, and in the same vein I suppose that if he never had children he would have favored one of his sisters to be queen.

The Office of the Marshal of the Realm, i.e. the Royal Court, formally recommended to Parliament in 1977 that it change the Act of Succession to the same system used in Denmark, the Netherlands, and Great Britain. At the time, these three countries allowed a woman to be queen if and only if she had no brothers.

I think it is safe to say that the recommendation of the Royal Court is the recommendation of the King.

Note that in its recommendation, the Office supports introducing equal primogeniture if introducing the Danish/Dutch/British system is unfeasible, but it strongly recommends implementing it for future descendants only and allowing the King's potential future oldest son if born before the change to become king, bypassing Victoria.

Refer to the Riksmarskalksämbetet's comments on page 29 and 15.

om kvinnlig tronföljd Proposition 1977/78:71 - Riksdagen




Would you happen to have a link to these interviews?




That was reportedly the case for the Crown Princess, if the rumors are to be believed, but not for Prince Carl Philip. Sofia Hellqvist was permitted to participate in family and even official events at a much earlier stage than Daniel Westling.

Personally, I have trouble understanding why Mr. Westling should have been considered unsuitable. The King himself married a commoner, and Princess Lilian, who was fully accepted by the King and the public, was of a working-class family background.

Jean-Baptiste Bernadotte's background was not noble, either. A bourgeoise family, while educated (his father and brother were lawyers), didn't mean much in the France of the Ancien Regime. Queen Desirée's father and brother sold cloth.. But bernadotte himself was a gifted commander and great on dealing with foreign nations and the Swedish people were sick of their aristocracy and Royal family (the Wasa) fighting. So they accepted when their aristocracy killed king Gustav III. and later send his son, the new king Gustav IV. and his family away, making Gustav III.'s brother Karl their new king. Who adopted Bernadotte (after a Danish prince, who was his adoptee before Bernadotte, died childless through an accident).
Reply With Quote
  #480  
Old 09-01-2020, 04:12 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Bellevue, United States
Posts: 1,315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
Families have to be defined somehow so that we can distinguish who belongs to each of them or not. The simplest and most straightforward definition is that one is a member of a given family when he or she uses the family's name. And the traditional naming convention, which had been observed in Europe for centuries, was that family names were transmitted in paternal line.
You completely miss the point.

Traditional naming conventions were sexist. Women "belonged" to their husbands and therefore did not transmit their own surnames or dynastic membership to their children. It's an artificial, man-made convention.

And the idea that a name is "the simplest and most straightforward definition" of membership in family is absurd. Names are artificial labels that can be changed.

Biology defines membership in a family not names. I am a member of my mother's family just as much as my father's.

Engage in mental gymnastics if you wish, but male-preference primogeniture is based on sexist rules and conventions.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
carl gustav, constitution, constitutional change, crown princess victoria, king carl xvi gustav, prince carl philip, succession, 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
What Would You Change? Lena Royal Chit Chat 21 01-11-2015 07:09 PM
When did your opinion of Diana change and why? ysbel Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 1113 06-05-2011 11:20 PM
Change of name of our community to TRF... Andy R Forum Announcements and Admin 2 08-29-2004 04:29 PM




Popular Tags
abdication althorp anastasia anastasia once upon a time bridal gown british chittagong cht clarence house danish royalty diana princess of wales dubai dutch dutch royal family earl of snowdon facts general news thread heraldry hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume hill historical drama house of glucksburg imperial household intro italian royal family jacobite japan jewellery jumma king salman languages list of rulers mail mary: crown princess of denmark monaco history nepalese royal jewels nobel 2019 northern ireland norway norwegian royal family palestine popularity prince charles of luxembourg prince daniel prince dimitri princess chulabhorn walailak princess laurentien princess of orange princess ribha queen mathilde random facts royal dress-ups royal jewels royal marriage royal re-enactments. royal wedding royal wedding gown saudi arabia serbian royal family settings snowdon spencer family swedish royal family thailand tracts uae customs united states of america wittelsbach working royals; full-time royals; part-time royals;


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:13 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises
×