Posted on 06/19/2010 10:47:20 PM PDT by Cincinna
Sweden hosted the biggest European royal wedding since that of Prince Charles and Lady Diana Spencer, when Crown Princess Victoria married commoner Daniel Westling.
The marriage, a love match that has weathered the disapproval of the bride's father, King Carl XVI Gustaf, who was initially horrified that his heir was marrying her former fitness trainer, and growing indifference from the Swedish public, who have increasingly questioned the monarchy's modern relevance, took place in Stockholm's Storkyrkan Cathedral late on Saturday afternoon.
Determined to mark the day with a majestic ceremony the Swedish Royal Family had invited several crowned heads of Europe for their daughter's marriage to Mr Westling, 36, who now becomes HRH Prince Daniel, Duke of Vastergotland.
As the couple stood at the Cathedral altar at 3.30 yesterday - co incidently the same church in which the Crown Princess's parents, King Carl XVI Gustaf and Queen Silvia, were married and on the date of their 34th wedding anniversary - Victoria looked regal and demure in an ivory silk, short-sleeved, off-the-shoulder gown, designed by Par Engsheden.
The newly created Prince appeared confident and immaculately groomed: a far cry from the long-haired, rather scruffy young man who was first pictured in the Swedish newspapers eight years ago when the news broke that the Crown Princess was dating him.
As he uttered an enthusiastic ''ja'' during his wedding vows, his eyes filled with tears as he turned to smile at his new wife.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
Thanks Cincinna. The Muzzies are going to run the royal family and the rest of the Swedes right out of Sweden.
Of course, Norway is worse. Crown Prince Haakon married an unwed mother, the father of whose child was a drug dealer. While no one in my family has worked for royalty in nearly 100 years, I am just applaed by the collapse of European Royalty and sense of propriety. The Hapsburg's may have been famously foolish at times, by I can't imagine them allowing anything like this.
I wouldn’t hold the Hapsburgs up as a model for anything. The current and past few generations have been totally decadent and corrupt.
He is also a successful multimillionaire and owns several gyms of his own. Not entirely ‘the help.’
“Crown Prince Haakon married an unwed mother, the father of whose child was a drug dealer.”
And a former drug addict herself and the father is an ex-con. Real winner there.
The reason she wore that particular tiara is that it was a present from Napoleon of France to Desiree Clary, who was to become queen of the first Bernadotte king in Sweden in 1814. Thus, it is worn largely for historic reasons rather than estetic.
“How much did the Swedish taxpayers pony up for this shindig?”
The taxpayers put in some 10-14 M Swedish kronor, which mostly covered security and such issues.
The taxpayers received at least some 500 M Swedish kronor due to taxes on extra goods and services generated by the wedding. The monarchy is a great source of income to the average taxpayer, not that the leftist media usually portrays it that way...
With its historical background I think I would have left the crown in the vault and worn it on an official occasion. A wedding is more a personal occasion than an official one, in my opinion, so I think she could have gotten away with something more esthetic and skipped the tradition. But then again, maybe she really likes the look of the crown and thinks it’s beautiful. Or maybe she has the same bad taste as her mother. Cameos look like carved Ivory soap (something we did as kids to combat boredom), so I’m prejudiced. One thing is probably sure here: She probably couldn’t wait to get it off her head. Princess Diana always said wearing them gave her headaches.
A wedding is more a personal occasion than an official one, in my opinionFor almost everyone that is exactly what it should be, but a royal wedding involving the heir to the throne is a bit different. After all, despite the monarchy being no more than representative and ceremonial these days and not giving the royal family any real powers, the union of Victoria and Daniel will (hopefully) give our country a future Head of State within a year or two.
While it may have been more democratic to vote for a groom (and it has been done in magazines since Victoria's birth!), she insisted on deciding herself. Depriving us of that choice, the least she could do was to make the 2-person election a public and official act ;)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.