Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Sweden''s Princess married a commoner. Please advise.........

Can any of you queens tell me what the difference is between a "Crown Princess" versus an everyday,run of the mill "Princess".

by Anonymousreply 8910/01/2012

err, she will be crowned one day?

by Anonymousreply 106/20/2010

Crown Prince (or Princess) is the title of the next in line in such monarchies that use the title - they absolutely will succeed to the throne, if they live - no-one can be born to knock them off the spot. Their spouse shares the title so Crown Princess is historically usually the wife of the Crown Prince, but Sweden has a Crown Princess in her own right because they changed the law of succession to simple primogeniture - the eldest child of either sex succeeds the current monarch.

by Anonymousreply 206/20/2010

I think that a "crown princess" is a daughter born to a king or queen whereas a "princess" can be created by marrying a prince, eg. Princess Diana.

by Anonymousreply 306/20/2010

It means the heir to the throne.

Thread closed.

by Anonymousreply 406/20/2010

No, r3 has it all wrong. The Crown Princess is scheduled to be the next Queen. She got the job in Sweden because she was born into the job. You can't marry into it.

by Anonymousreply 506/20/2010

Really, r5?

by Anonymousreply 606/20/2010

I just CAN'T wade into the other thread, but didn't we just hear she'd broken off with her fiance because he was a bit of a man-whore?

by Anonymousreply 706/20/2010

Yes, really r6. We're talking 20 and 21st century Sweden. You can't marry into the Crown Prince or Crown Princess job - in today's Sweden. Once again, we're not talking about Catherine the Great or kings and queens in other nation, we're talking about today's Sweden. Can you deal with it, r6?

by Anonymousreply 806/20/2010

Rub the sleep out of your eyes r5. I did write that a "crown princess" is born to it and that the garden variety "princess" can marry into the title.

R6 makes a point however. We can only hope.

by Anonymousreply 906/20/2010

Crown Prince or Princess refers to the heir to the throne, or his wife.

In Sweden, Victoria is HRH The Crown Princess of Sweden as the heir, while husband is now HRH Prince Daniel, Duke of Västergötland (Victoria is Duchess of Västergötland in her own right). Usually, a husband does not share the titles of his wife, but in cases where a commoner is marrying a future monarch who is female, titles are usually granted so their children are born royal.

In Britain, the present Queen also married a commoner (technically, although Philip is actually more royal than The Queen). The day before their wedding, her father, George VI, created her future husband Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Merioneth and Baron Greenwich, with the style and rank of Royal Highness. Once she became pregnant, her father issued letters patent stating her children would be entitled to the rank and style of HRH Prince/Princess of the UK (rather than Lord/Lady as children of a Duke).

by Anonymousreply 1006/20/2010

In Britain, the present Queen also married a commoner (technically, although Philip is actually more royal than The Queen).

OK, I'm curious, how is Philip "technically" a commoner (was he ever removed from the line of succession?) and how can he be "more royal" than the daughter of a king?

by Anonymousreply 1106/20/2010

Five monarchies in Europe have eliminated male preference and do not adhere to Salic laws of succession: Sweden, Norway, Netherlands, Belgium and Denmark.

In Sweden, HRH Vitoria is the heir

In Norway, HRH Ingrid Alexandra will be the Queen after HRH CP Haakon dies.

In The Netherlands, HRH Catherina-Amalia will inherit the thrown from CP Willem-Alexander.

In Belgium, HRH Princess Louise will inherit the throne from HRH Prince Philip.

Denmark is the only country where the firstborn was a male, so HRH Christian will take over from HRH CP Frederick when the time comes.

Of course Spain is still under Salic law, as is England. But it's interesing that the other major European countries with monarchies will eventually be ruled by females.

by Anonymousreply 1206/20/2010

He is *not* more royal than the Queen. He's Greek royalty and has Romanov blood, and never was a commoner. He's a lesser royal than Elizabeth, though.

r6: Catherine the Great was never a Crown Princess, with a view to inheriting the throne. You missed the point entirely. She took the crown upon her husband's death, due to intrigue and politics, and against the next in line to the throne (next after her deceased husband, that is).

Btw, Prince Daniel of Sweden won't be 'Crown Prince' along with his Crown Princess wife, just the way Prince Philip of England is not 'King of England', even though his spouse is the Queen. The male spouse of a female monarch must never be level with his wife, re titles and function.

by Anonymousreply 1306/20/2010

R11, he was born into the Greek royal family and also the Danish royal family. He grew up in exile in the UK. He changed religion, renounced his titles and allegiances to become a British citizen. I think this was so he'd be in a position to allowed to marry the then Princess Elizabeth.

I have no idea of the details. Regardless, he's a nasty piece of work.

by Anonymousreply 1406/20/2010

Share more with us r13 - expert. Who is your favorite Euro royal and why?

Which Euro royal seems to have the widest array of interests?

by Anonymousreply 1506/20/2010

r14, he's also cousins with Elizabeth, but removed by the nth degree.

His maternal grandparents were Mountbatten, i.e. Windsors. He has (some) English blood as well.

by Anonymousreply 1606/20/2010

R15: Queen Margrethe of Denmark is known and admired for her many talents. She is a gifted painter, makes theater costumes and she has also translated books from french to danish. She seems to be very intelligent and intellectual and is also very, very regal. She is also the only royal who can handle a glass of champagne, a cigarette, a clutch bag and at the same time shake hands with people. She's my favourite royal.

by Anonymousreply 1706/20/2010

But of course, r15.

My favourite (sorry, I prefer the BE spelling) Euro royal is Crown Prince Haakon of Norway, for the simple fact that he is very gay friendly. That should answer your second question as well.

Before he got married, and upon returning from his studies at Berkeley, he visited gay bars in Oslo, to show solidarity. You may say he was just posing, but he's otherwise a shy guy, and I believe the gesture was sincere. In interviews he said he felt gays weren't integrated enough into Norwegian society - one of the most liberal countries on earth, mind you.

He then married a single mother of one, a girl with a 'background', against strong initial resistance; they subsequently became one of the most popular royal couples in Europe.

He also slagged off the British press for going on his nerves about Prince William (he didn't attend one of Will's silly b-day parties while living in London).

He's great!

by Anonymousreply 1806/20/2010

r17 is not the expert aka me.

Thanks for sharing, though.

by Anonymousreply 1906/20/2010

His Royal Hotness Prince Carl Philip of Sweden should be Crown Prince and the future king. Gorgeousness should count royally for his degree of hotness.

Princess Victoria, you're beautiful, but get out of the way for your even more sexy and gorgeous brother.

by Anonymousreply 2006/20/2010

Philip's great-great grandmother was Queen Fucking Victoria. How in the world is technically a commoner in the UK?

by Anonymousreply 2106/20/2010

Is it true that Queen Margrethe sets aside one day each week to pursue the arts -- no official business allowed?

by Anonymousreply 2206/20/2010

OP - were you raised in a barn?

by Anonymousreply 2306/20/2010

R7, that happened to her younger sister, Princess Madeleine.

by Anonymousreply 2406/20/2010

R22: That's what I have read. And her husband is rumoured to be bisexual and have affairs with men and she is ok with it.

by Anonymousreply 2506/20/2010

Dronning Margarete is a riot! She also has the best sense of style, out of all the monarchs in Europe. He gown last night was amazing, yet not overbearing, i.e. she didn't upstage the bride (as Princess Madeleine - Vic's younger sister - was trying to do)

Margarete's hubby is kookoo btw..

by Anonymousreply 2606/20/2010

Why wasn't the Swedish royal wedding televised? I'm a news junkie, but even I could have taken a break from this disasterous oil spill and Joren van der Sloot.

This royal wedding would have been fabulous ton watch and a big hit in the U.S.

Why wasn't it on TV goddammit??!!

by Anonymousreply 2706/20/2010

I missed the wedding on television.

Who won?

by Anonymousreply 2806/20/2010

Camaroon was out in the first round.

by Anonymousreply 2906/20/2010

r27, Swedish television were streaming it online, and worldwide.

They had the monopoly on the broadcast, I presume.

It was shown on German national television, so the programme was available for purchase, I would think.

You can still see it, if you go to their website: svt.se, then click on 'svt play'.

by Anonymousreply 3006/20/2010

Will Vicki's fugly commoner husband become a King when her daddy dies and she becomes Queen?

by Anonymousreply 3106/20/2010

no, r31, as mentioned upthread, he won't be King.

He will be royal consort, and remain Prince and Duke.

by Anonymousreply 3206/20/2010

R31. Think of it in terms of Prince Philip of England. He remained a prince even when his wife Crown Princess Elizabeth became Queen.

Prince Daniel of Sweden will remain a prince when Crown Princess Victoria becomes Queen of Sweden.

Victoria is the Crown Princess as was Elizabeth. The royal lineage passes through them, not through their husbands since their husbands are not of the royal houses of each respective country.

by Anonymousreply 3306/20/2010

R33, I don't get it. A king can marry any trollop, and she'll become queen. If Sweden is allegedly so progressive, why can't Danny boy become king?

by Anonymousreply 3406/20/2010

Royal Experts...question if I may:

Suppose Crown Princess Victoria had married a Crown Prince of another country (in other words, he was due to become king of that other country), would he become King of Sweden instead of his king own country?

Or would Crown Princess Victoria become queen of that other country (thus relinquishing her future role of Queen of Sweden)? Or would Victoria retain her title of Princess (instead of becoming queen) of her husband's country? Afterall, Prince Philip didn't become King of England. Why would Victoria become queen of her husband's country?

by Anonymousreply 3506/20/2010

R35 : If Victoria of Sweden and Haakon of Norway would have gotten married, she either would have become crown princess of Norway and later queen of Norway (and she would have handed over the Swedish throne to her younger brother) OR Haakon would have handed over the Norwegian throne to his sister to become prince of Sweden.

Anybody can become a queen by marriage, but to become a king, one must be born into that position.

by Anonymousreply 3606/20/2010

OP, if you want this type of discussion, the term that you should have used is "Ka-Weens". please manke a note of it. Tia

by Anonymousreply 3706/20/2010

r34: A king/regining Queen is the superior, something you have to be born into. The Queens, "trollops", who are married into royalty are technically Queen consorts and not a Queen regant who is far more powerful.

by Anonymousreply 3806/20/2010

[quote]In Belgium, HRH Princess Louise will inherit the throne from HRH Prince Philip.

It's Princess Elisabeth R12. Princess Louise is the eldest child of Prince Laurent and she is currently nr 13 in the line of succession.

by Anonymousreply 3906/20/2010

England does not have Salic law. The Salic law, as interpreted by Clovis, did not allow females to inherit, thus daughters could never inherit their fathers' titles. Many European countries, especially France, adhered to the Salic law, but England never did. That is why Elizabeth I was a reigning monarch, but there has never been a reigning queen of France.

by Anonymousreply 4006/20/2010

R40 is quite right that Britain has never had the Salic law. It currently has a succession defined by Act of Parliament, which could be changed if people got their act together.

Catherine the Great isn't relevant at all. In 18th century Russia the reigning tsar or empress nominated their own successor. Catherine was a usurper, because she had her husband murdered and he definitely didn't nominate her - though, obviously she said he had and no-one was going to contradict her.

by Anonymousreply 4106/20/2010

r41, the case of Catherine the Great 'usurping' the throne is a bit more complex than the very abridged version you gave, as you probably know. It is not historically proven beyond doubt that she had her husband murdered, for one. And there are more aspects/questions of his and her reign that are constantly being debated by scholars.

In any case, she never was a Crown Princess - of the regnant-to-be variety - and that is the main point. Had she stayed away from the crown, she would have become Empress dowager after her husband's death.

Btw, Sweden may be progressive, but no royal house will allow a King beside a Queen regnant. It's a contradiction in terms. There is no 'King consort', and why should there be? 'Prince consort' already sums up the position.

There can be only one ruler.

by Anonymousreply 4206/20/2010

[quote]It currently has a succession defined by Act of Parliament, which could be changed if people got their act together.

The changes to the Act of Settlement to allow for date of birth rather than gender to dictate succession requires the approval of every country that has the British monarch as its head of state. As does the requirement that the Monarch not be married to a Catholic. That's the reason why the Act of Settlement has never been altered; it's just too much work.

Foreign leaders were also the reason why Edward VIII had to abdicate; although Churchill wanted him to stay even if he married his whore, leaders of the other countries in the British Empire refused to allow this and he was therefore forced to abdicate.

by Anonymousreply 4306/20/2010

None of these monarchs rule, with the single exception of Prince Albert (who is not, ironically, a King). They reign; the leader of the political party in power rules their respective countries, as they are all constitutional monarchies where the monarch has no day-to-day power and officiates in a predominantly ceremonial role. They're basically the world's best paid welfare recipients.

Monaco is the only absolute monarchy left in Europe.

by Anonymousreply 4406/20/2010

Wrong, r44.

Ever heard of Liechtenstein?

Both Monaco and Liechtenstein are unable to join the EU, because of their status as direct monarchies.

And yes, monarchs do rule -- depending on your definition of the term. 'Rule' as opposed to In any case, they do often have a vestige of power, especially in a case of a national emergency. The British monarch certainly does. She is also officially labeled the 'ruler of all her lands' (i.e. the British Commonwealth).

And in the NL, the formation of the new (potentially controversial) government was pending on Queen Beatrix' approval. She can demand further discussion before granting approval, for example.

by Anonymousreply 4506/20/2010

I meant to say: 'rule' as opposed to 'govern'.

To rule and to reign are essentially the same, in constitutional monarchies.

by Anonymousreply 4606/20/2010

Love you for saying that crown prince Haakon is your favorite, R18. Because of her background, princess Mette Marit is also VERY gay friendly. She has often supported the HIV/AIDS cause, and she has admitted that it's a cause she's very passionate about.. All to the horrors of the political right wing. Many thing she is too liberal and therefore of course "too political."

Crown Prince Haakon may not be as clasically handsome as prince Carl Phillip of Sweden, but I do think he's quite handsome still. Carl Phillip of Sweden looks like a puppy. Crown prince Haakon is more like a manly man, if that makes any sense.

by Anonymousreply 4706/20/2010

I hope Prince William's first born is a girl.

by Anonymousreply 4806/20/2010

[quote]To rule and to reign are essentially the same, in constitutional monarchies.

According to the Queen's own website, she doesn't rule the UK, let alone 'all her lands'.

by Anonymousreply 4906/20/2010

Being Royal today doesn't mean much. They generally have no, or very little, power in most monarchies today. Like here, our prime minister act as a president does in other countries. The only area I can think of where the royals still have some power is the laws. If I'm not mistaken the king has to sign a law before it can become effective, at least that's how it was when we got gay marriage. That said, most Royals today are just for show, like travelling, meet and greet with the people, doing humanitarian work etc.

by Anonymousreply 5006/20/2010

The monarch, at least in the UK, has 'residual' power to refuse consent to any legislation that has been approved by both houses of Parliament. However, they refuse at their own peril. The last British monarch to do this was Queen Anne. QEII would never be so gauche, but bonnie Prince Charlie will probably think he can exert some power when he comes to the throne. He'll learn pretty quickly that the freedoms he has to speak his mind as Prince of Wales will no longer be available to him as King.

by Anonymousreply 5106/20/2010

r10 probably means that Philip is the son of two royals (father a Greek royal, mother a minor German Battenberg, later Mountbatten, but still royal). Elizabeth's mother was a tried/true Scottish commoner, albeit a noble one (daughter of an Earl). It's of course all moot at this point.

Philip, who's parents split when he was very young, was batted around to different relatives who ended up raising him. The main caretaker was his maternal uncle Lord Mountbatten, who put him in British boarding school (Gordounston?) and got him a spot in the Brit navy...when Philip decided to become a brit citizen and fight for the UK in WWII, he changed his name to "Philip Mountbatten" in deference to his uncle and mother's family, although he was still recognized by royal courts as a Prince of Greece & Denmark. So he was, in fact, a commoner when he met and married Elizabeth.

by Anonymousreply 5206/20/2010

Oh yeah, and I just want to say one thing.. Whoever said that thing about gay marriage and royals and named the countries.. Portugal does have gay marriage, but Portugal is not a monarchy. They have a president as far as I know. So then we are down to Sweden, Norway, Belgium, Holland and Spain.

by Anonymousreply 5306/20/2010

Mountbatten = Mountbattenberg. They're Krauts, the lot of them.

by Anonymousreply 5406/20/2010

The Royal families of these countries have nothing to do with gay marriage rights. That is the responsibility of the government of the day, which is run by the elected party.

by Anonymousreply 5506/20/2010

Philip was hardly a top-drawer royal. His mother was morganatic as a Battenberg princess and his father spent most of his life in exile from Greece and broke.

by Anonymousreply 5606/20/2010

True r56 but his grandfather was 1st Sea Lord in the British navy and his grandmother Queen Victoria's favorite grand-daughter. His aunt was Queen of Sweden as well.

by Anonymousreply 5706/20/2010

r52, if she was from noble descent (daughter of an Earl), she was not a 'tried/true commoner'. Please.

Princess Diana was from a noble family as well, and no one would claim Prince Charles married a commoner.

By the by, the Queen Mother grew up at feudal Glamis Castle, in Scotland.

r47, I agree, he's manly looking. Easily more attractive than CP of Sweden, who looks too pretty-ish (and young) imo.

by Anonymousreply 5906/21/2010

In Belgium, HRH Princess ELISABETH ( not Louise) will inherit the throne from HRH Prince Filip (not Philip).

by Anonymousreply 6006/21/2010

[quote]There can be only one ruler.

We beg to differ.

by Anonymousreply 6106/21/2010

crown prince, heir to the throne of a kingdom or principality

prince not crown prince, title of nobility in close relation to a ruling family of a kingdom or principality (though not nec. the son of a rulling monarch or prince)

by Anonymousreply 6206/21/2010

THIS is a real princess.

(Sorry, but I just came across this and had it post somewhere. Prepare yourselves: I truly think it's a 45 second YouTube masterpiece...)

by Anonymousreply 6306/21/2010

r61, William and Mary were a singular case, because they came from a different country (the Netherlands), to take (i.e. rescue) a throne that had unexpectedly become vacant.

Neither of them were primed to inherit the English throne at some point, and neither of them had previously been English Crown Prince/Crown Princess, i.e. Prince(ss) of Wales.

We're talking about heirs apparent in this thread, and that is a very different category.

by Anonymousreply 6406/21/2010

Only aging queens-- and you know what I mean-- would pretend to know so much on this topic and argue it historically.

This is one of those many times that being gay is so fun!

by Anonymousreply 6506/21/2010

it's descendAnt, r65, spelled with an "a".

True nobility is well-educated, and knows how to spell.

Noblesse oblige!

by Anonymousreply 6606/21/2010

I stand corrected, R66! Second vodka.

by Anonymousreply 6706/21/2010

Beg to differ R64. Mary II was James II oldest child and until he contracted that unfortunate second marriage was Heiress Apparent.

by Anonymousreply 6806/21/2010

William of Orange was a big old queen. He had a number of 'favorites', the most infamous of whom was Arnold van Keppel who started out as a page boy and ended up an Earl.

by Anonymousreply 6906/21/2010

[quote]his grandmother Queen Victoria's favorite grand-daughter.

BITCH, how dare you! Grandmama's favourite granddaughter was ME! ME! ME! Not to mention my dear old mama was ALSO Grandmama's favourite daughter!

by Anonymousreply 7001/29/2012

Seriously you bumped a 1 1/2 year old thread for such a lame comeback?

WTH is wrong with you?

by Anonymousreply 7101/29/2012

Go fetch chickens and choke on one, impertinent peasant at R71!

by Anonymousreply 7201/29/2012

Her husband has one of the most terminal cases of gayface I have ever seen.

by Anonymousreply 7301/29/2012

This thread is more interesting than anything we've had in all the Newt-Mitt-Michele threads for the past 1 1/2 years. Thanks for the bump r70.

by Anonymousreply 7401/29/2012

Eugenia of Battenberg looks NOTHING Spanish... one would think living in a place all your life you would "become" part of it...

Plus... she does have bitch-face doesn't she?

by Anonymousreply 7501/30/2012

King Alfonso XIII was a handsome man, no wonder he had all that pussy

by Anonymousreply 7601/30/2012

Carl Phillip is the real star of that family.

by Anonymousreply 7701/30/2012

R73, so do half of the men in Sweden.

by Anonymousreply 7801/30/2012

Victoria is one of my favorite royals. It's great that she married who she loved. She's have said before that the throne comes first then love.

by Anonymousreply 7909/29/2012

A Crown Princess is a Princess who has won RuPaul's Drag Race.

by Anonymousreply 8009/29/2012

[quote]You missed the point entirely.

Gee, imagine that happening here on DL where nobody talks out their ass with impunity about shit they have no clue whatsoever.

by Anonymousreply 8109/29/2012

I had no idea that the Swedish had such dark features.

by Anonymousreply 8209/29/2012

Queen Silvia is Brazilian-German - the kids are mutts.

by Anonymousreply 8309/29/2012

The Swedish queen is Brazilian, but with German ancestry, if I recall correctly, R82.

by Anonymousreply 8409/29/2012

So what is the deal with the Mountbatten/Battenberg family? What was the name originally, and why did a part of the family seemingly emigrate?

by Anonymousreply 8509/29/2012

QE II ultimately sacked the Prime Mininister of Australia in 1975. The British Monarchy has a lot of political power. When push comes to shove those laws are there to be utilised - make no mistake.

by Anonymousreply 8609/29/2012

A crown princess is a female member of the royal family first in line to the throne. A princess is a title of nobility and, in some countries, not necessarily a royal at all.

by Anonymousreply 8709/29/2012

The origins of the Battenberg nobility are Hesse-Darmstadt in Germany. The British Battenbergs changed their name to Mountbatten during World War I to distance themselves from everything German.

by Anonymousreply 8810/01/2012

[quote]Mountbatten = Mountbattenberg. They're Krauts, the lot of them.

R54, "berg" translated to English means "mountain." Therefore, your silly post lists them as mountain Batten mountain. Still trying for that GED snookums?

by Anonymousreply 8910/01/2012
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.