Friday, 26 June 2015

Kate Loves: Tiaras

For today's 'Kate Loves' post we're going to discuss one of my favourite aspects of royal watching...tiaras! Many of us grew up reading about fairytale princesses marrying their handsome princes in ethereal gowns and of course - the obligatory tiaras.


The Queen is said to have the largest and most valuable collection of tiaras in the world, but it's interesting to note Her Majesty only elected to lend a piece from the collection to one of her daughters-in-law, Sophie, Countess of Wessex, on her wedding day.

The then Lady Diana Spencer had use of a family heirloom: the Spencer Tiara. The piece is now in the possession of Diana's brother Earl Spencer.

Royal Post

For Sarah Ferguson's wedding to Prince Andrew, the Queen bought her a modern diamond tiara and necklace from Garrards. As a new bride, the Duchess of York reportedly ran around showing off the jewels and shouting, "Clock the rocks"...

PA

For Sophie, however, the monarch's favourite daughter-in-law who married Prince Edward in 1999, a tiara from Her Majesty's collection was altered with pieces said to date from Queen Victoria's time. Royal commentators have drawn lines between the wedding tiaras and the marriages associated with them. While neither the Waleses or Yorks had happy endings, Edward and Sophie's marriage has endured the test of time and the Countess has become a valuable asset to the Royal family.

British Monarchy /PA

My own interest in royal jewels began in the weeks leading up to the royal wedding as articles began to fill column inches with headlines including, "Which Tiara Will Kate Middleton Wear?" and quite a few claiming Kate would forego the traditional headwear in favour of a more low-key look - wearing flowers in her hair. Kate's hairdresser at the time, James Pryce, revealed Kate was originally considering to wear flowers in hair but the plan changed a couple of months before the wedding. Indeed, the Queen Mother, formerly Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon opted for flowers on her big day.


Prince William and his grandmother are said to enjoy a wonderful relationship, and Her Majesty has been enormously supportive of him throughout the years and very much so in the lead up to the wedding. Of course she was going to lend his bride a tiara with royal history - a visible token of the confidence she has in Kate, and I'm sure quite some consideration went into choosing the perfect piece for the royal wedding. I, for one, was very pleased to see Kate arrive at Westminster Abbey wearing the elegant Halo tiara.


The Cartier Halo Tiara was made by Cartier in 1936 and purchased by the Duke of York (later King George VI) for the Duchess of York (later the Queen Mother). It is a striking piece composed of stylised petals, paved with 739 brilliant-cut diamonds and 149 baguette-cut diamonds. The name derives from its halo shape.

The Royal Collection

Indeed, it has been described as a "Starter Tiara" for royal ladies over the years. Apparently it wasn't a favourite of Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother and she soon passed it on to her daughter Princess Elizabeth (now Queen Elizabeth II) as an 18th birthday gift, however, she never wore it publicly.


It was quickly lent out to other royal ladies; most noticeably Princess Margaret wore it several times as an early tiara, as did Princess Anne in the early 1970s.

Photos 1 & 2 Princess Margaret; Photos 3 & 4 Princess Anne

A photo of the tiara from Cartier's archive.

Cartier

By the time, Kate wore it for her wedding it had not been publicly seen in decades, meaning while it is a strong family piece, it doesn't hold a strong history and it isn't instantly associated with any one member of the Royal family. Kate teamed the piece with diamond oak leaf earrings echoing the Middleton family coat of arms. Michael and Carole Middleton commissioned them from Robinson Pelham and they worked beautifully with the Halo tiara. I would love to see both pieces worn together again in the future.


We didn't see the Duchess of Cambridge in a tiara again until December 2013, when she and Prince William made an unexpected appearance at their first joint white-tie function at the annual Diplomatic Reception. Hosted by the Queen at the Palace Ballroom, Buckingham Palace, it is considered one of the most glittering events on the royal calendar. Sadly, photos are not usually released from the event and we had to make do with arrival pictures.


A white-tie event calls for a tiara, and royal watchers were delighted to see Her Majesty lent Kate the Papyrus tiara, also known as the Lotus Flower tiara.


The dainty tiara which goes by many names was much like the Halo tiara, seen on the Queen Mother, then the Duchess of York during her early years. It was made from one of her wedding gifts in 1923 - a necklace of a Greek key pattern with pendant diamonds and pearls given by her husband.

Order of Splendor

Garrard jewellers dismantled it and created the Papyrus tiara instead. As you can see, it is a very delicate design of fanned motifs crowned by floating diamond arches and studded with two pearls at the base and a central top pearl.

Tiara Mania

Geoffrey C. Munn, author of Tiaras - A History of Splendour, described it this way:

'One of the prettiest of Queen Elizabeth’s tiaras…was Egyptian in inspiration, arranged as a band of stylized lotus flowers and overreaching arches, with the graduated pinnacles surmounted by a single pearl.'

The then Duchess of York wore it in a fashionable bandeau style during the late 1920s. In 1959 she gave it to her daughter Princess Margaret who wore it for numerous occasions. Margaret lent it to Serena Stanhope for her wedding to her son Viscount Linley in 1993. After Princess Margaret passed away the tiara went back to the main collection and was not seen again until Kate wore it.

The Queen Mother/Princess Margaret/Serena Stanhope

The Duchess accessorised with a dazzling pair of chandelier diamond earrings lent to her by the Queen. She also wore them in Los Angeles in 2011.


Many asked why didn't Kate wear the Halo tiara for the event? It was actually part of a Cartier exhibit in Paris at the time. So it remains to been seen which of the tiaras will be Kate's 'go-to' for the time being, though I'm hoping for the Papyrus. What about you?

Interesting points to note on both occasions Kate wore a tiara - they were both early tiaras for the Queen Mother and Princess Margaret, and Kate teamed both with a demi-chignon hairstyle and an Alexander McQueen gown.


Definitive expert Geoffrey Munn offers this advice on when a tiara should be worn and how it should fit:

“It was the event and not the status of the wearer that signals whether or not tiaras will be worn. In the past, full evening dress (white tie and medals) was the starting pistol for tiaras.
 However, even in 1900 people needed the reassurance supplied on the invitation, Tiaras will be worn, was shown to the bottom left of the invitation. The strictest protocol proscribed tiaras for girls and unmarried women. They were also proscribed in public places of entertainment like hotels and hired ballrooms.
It should be placed “with the surface of the jewel work in the same plane as your face, so that the full impact of the jewel work is made on the other guests. Worn on the back of the head in the manner of an Alice band is hopeless, as the scintillation of the stones is lost to the ceiling void.”

We expect to see Kate attend very, very few white-tie occasions over the next few years and wear either the Halo or Papyrus tiaras for such events.  Indeed, this will change when Prince William becomes first-in-line to the throne and we'll more than likely see Kate wearing a more substantial tiara with dazzling jewels from the collection. Diana's former butler, Paul Burrell, described an 18ft tall wardrobe containing an enormous safe with drawer upon drawer of jewels which looked like "an Aladdin's cave".

“It was a royal Aladdin’s cave: a private collection of tiaras, necklaces, brooches, earrings, bracelets and gems that had been passed down from monarch to monarch.”

Possible tiaras we may see the Duchess wear down the line, when she is Princess of Wales (presumably the title she will take) and Queen Consort include Queen Mary's Fringe Tiara - originally a necklace inherited by Queen Victoria which was later remodelled into a tiara and worn by Queen Mary. It was worn by the Queen Mother too, and made an unforgettable appearance as the Queen's wedding tiara.

Order of Splendor

The Strathmore Rose Tiara is another piece worn by the Queen Mother, who received it as a gift from her father for her wedding in 1923. The diamond tiara features a garland of roses mounted in silver and gold. It's a beautiful, yet understated tiara and it's exactly the type of piece I could see Kate gravitating towards.


Finally, the Cambridge Lovers Knot Tiara has often been suggested as a possibility for the Duchess. The day before Prince Charles married Lady Diana Spencer, Her Majesty gave Diana a red leather box and inside lay the tiara. Perhaps one of the most famous tiaras of all the time, it is synonymous with the late Princess Diana, who found it quite heavy and headache inducing. Because of its history I would be surprised if Kate wore it, however, William gave Kate his mother's engagement ring, so it remains a possibility down the line. If not Kate, it would be quite a piece for Princess Charlotte of Cambridge someday...


When will we see Kate wear a tiara again? That remains to be seen, though I am very much hoping the Cambridges will attend the state dinner in October during President Xi Jinping of China's state visit. Prince William issued the invitation in Beijing in March and it would seem very fitting for William and Kate to attend. Watch this space. :)

238 comments:

  1. Rebecca - Sweden26 June 2015 at 06:13

    I squeeled when I saw the title of this post. Even though I'm quite knowledgable on this subject by now it wwas a fun read to see it in a Kate loves post :D Look forward to seeing everyones comments.


    Btw, what do you guys think. Is there a tiara possibility this fall with the Chinese state visit? :D

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rebecca, I so want her to wear the Cambridge Lover's Knot Tiara to
      that state visit. miracles do happen.
      :)

      Delete
  2. Beautiful post as always :)

    ReplyDelete
  3. I feel like Kate should have been given a gift by the Queen, a new tiara of Kate's own. She's the daughter in law of her first son and it would have been nice to see Kate in her own special tiara however small it may have been. I admire King Carl and Queen Sonja for giving Sofia a brand new tiara as a gift.

    I am a huge lover of jewels and have many coffee table book son jewels. I just drool over all the pics of the tiaras especially the ones that belong to European royalties!! So much history, such beauty they all are!! priceless!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maggie - Minneapolis26 June 2015 at 08:01

      The fact that Sarah Ferguson got a new tiara but Sophie got an old one I think shows that it's a greater sign of respect to be given one that's already in the family than it is to be bought a new one. It makes sense to me - getting an old tiara says to me "welcome to the family," whereas buying a new one is a nice gift but not quite as welcoming in my mind. These tiaras have a tremendous amount of history - I'd definitely prefer an old one over a new one - getting to wear a tiara once worn by the Queen Mother is amazing imo.

      Delete
    2. Do you nean king carl gustav and queen silvia of sweden? Sonja is the wife of king harald of norway :)

      Delete
    3. Rebecca - Sweden26 June 2015 at 11:52

      I actually think it's more important and nice that she got to use one of the Queen Mothers tiaras. It shows her as a part of the family and is a link between the past and the future.

      Ps. Sweden is King Carl Gustaf and Queen Silvia, Norway is King Harald and Queen Sonja. :)

      Delete
    4. I agree that a piece owned by the royal family is more significant because of the history associated with it.

      Delete
    5. I wonder if Kate ever has time to reflect on the historic significance of some of the pieces she has worn. Like the maple leaf in Canada, etc. Being an art history graduate one would think so. Of course when you are married to a man who's lineage goes directly back to the first king in recorded history, the rest might seem a little less significant by comparison. And then, of course, there is all that architecture and furniture and artwork and traditional pomp and circumstance. (Did you know that Queen Elizabeth I is buried at Westminster Abbey where Kate married William. I think Henry VIII is
      buried there also along with other monarchs.)

      Delete
  4. Hahaha omg I'm laughing so hard at the "clock the rocks" comment! That's just too funny. Thanks for putting that in there Charlotte.

    Princess Margaret looked so beautiful in her tiara as well as Princess Anne.
    I also loved Serena Stanhope's braided bun and tiara style she looked great.

    I never knew Kate originally was going to wear flower in her hair. It would have looked greatly different. Glad she decided to go for the tiara, although I'm sure flowers would have looked beautiful as well.
    On a related tiara note I also love the new Princess Sofia of Sweden's hair and tiara. I thought she looked great.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rebecca - Sweden26 June 2015 at 11:53

      I agree that I like that she wore a tiara. Some people complained it was to small, but I think it was just right for her. She's a rather simple gal after all :)

      Delete
    2. I thought her veil overwhelmed it a bit. Would have been nice if it stood up a bit more.

      Delete
    3. I suspect the tiara was chosen to complement the dress and earrings. I doubt the dress was chosen to
      go with the tiara. I think the tiara, as she wore it, was very "Kate." I wouldn't be surprised if the veil
      partly occluding the tiara was the plan. Especially after seeing how the same effect was accomplished
      with her hair minimising the Papyrus. She is apparently not a fan of ostentation and prefers more
      modest jewellery for herself.

      Delete
    4. Julia from Leominster28 June 2015 at 03:14

      Worth remembering that Sarah wore flowers in her hair at the beginning of the wedding and then removed them to reveal the tiara when they went to sign the register. I liked that touch myself but some found it theatrical.

      I too thought the tiara was a bit masked by the veil and that the veil lay awfully flat against Kate's head when I first watched the wedding but the look grew on me after looking at still photos. It created a nice balance of having the look of a jeweled band that many brides wear and still wearing an historic tiara.

      Delete
    5. I agree Bluhare. Just like wearing her hair down when she wore that huge diamond necklace of the queen's. Her
      hair hid the necklace.
      I wanted the tiara to be worn more prominently also. Of course I also wanted a few tiny diamonds interspersed in the lace on the bodice of her wedding gown.

      Delete
    6. I didn't like the earrings Kate wore with the papyrus tiara. I didn't like them with the BAFTA gown either. They mimic the style of the emerald earrings she wore in New York. I don't think they flatter her and she had so many others to choose from. I hope those are not a trend with her.

      Delete
  5. Tammy from California26 June 2015 at 06:50

    Ahhhhhh. Simply dreamy. I love how the Papyrus tiara is so 20's. Very Gatsby for sure! I have to say I really love the Halo tiara on Kate the most. It's pretty and on her is the right size. I loooooove Diana's tiara very much. It is very grand (aren't they all really?!) and just so pretty. When I read Charlottes suggestion of baby Charlotte, I got chills everywhere. now I wi drift off to sleep dreaming of these.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Maggie - Minneapolis26 June 2015 at 08:14

    I wouldn't be surprised if Kate wore the Cambridge Lovers' Knot Tiara. For one thing, it was made to copy Queen Mary's godmother's tiara. That godmother was the Duchess of Cambridge, so there's some cool history there for Kate. But also because for the most part, she seems to be trending towards copying Diana quite a bit (what she wore when George was born, George's clothes in the photographs released after Charlotte's birth, George's outfit at Trooping, etc.), and William must be okay with it since he gave her Diana's engagement ring. And they live in Anmer, which was said to be where Charles met with Camilla when he was cheating on Diana. That's way more history than what is attached to the tiara imo haha. I think she won't make it one of her more commonly worn tiaras, but I think we see it for a special occasion. I wish they'd save it for Harry's wife for Harry's wedding though, although it may be too opulent for someone marrying a prince who isn't very directly in line to the throne anymore. But it'd be a nice touch, especially since William and Kate got the engagement ring, which I think was actually Harry's first.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I heard that when Diana saw the Lover's Knot Tiara she said, "Oh, I got Brenda' s rocks!" Was that the name of Queen Mary's godmother? Being American I never understood that comment.

      Delete
    2. Brenda is a joking and very slightly rude nickname for the Queen.

      Delete
    3. I think it (Brenda) comes from Private Eye.

      Delete
    4. Julia from Leominster28 June 2015 at 03:15

      It is from Private Eye - Prince Philip was Keith as I recall. Not sure how insulting the royals see it as Charles and Camilla used similar pet common names - Fred and Gladys for themselves supposedly.

      Delete
    5. I have such high hopes of Kate wearing the Cambridge Lover's Knot Tiara.
      I agree Maggie that she is trending in trying to help in William's desire to keep his mother a "part of it all". And, William and Kate are Cambridges and they are in love so the tiara would be even more significant. I hope she doesn't wait until she is Princess of Wales or Queen to wear it. Wouldn't it be amazing if she wore it to the formal dinner when the Chinese leaders are in London soon. William likes to surprise people. Maybe he will have her wear it then.

      Delete
    6. Maggie - Minneapolis29 June 2015 at 02:25

      Anonymous 4:41 - I think Kate and William would want to save the tiara for something more special than the Chinese state visit, even if they don't wait until she's Princess of Wales. No offense to the Chinese visiting obviously. I'm also still just hoping they save it for Harry's wife, since Kate got the ring and Charlotte got the first use of the 'Diana' middle name. But yeah, might be too big for the wife of someone who probably won't be King. Although if Harry is married before Charles has a coronation, then it wouldn't be inappropriate for Harry's wife to wear it at the coronation maybe.

      Delete
  7. I would love to see Kate wear the Strathmore Rose Tiara in October! (Unfortunately that is months away!) I like the Papyrus Tiara better than the Halo Tiara. The Halo Tiara just seems so small. But, the Halo Tiara does seem to fit Kate's understated style. The Fringe Tiara looks scary--so sharp and pointy. Like something an ice princess would wear. Like the wicked witch of Narnia who made it winter all year with no Christmas. That's just how it strikes me. It is more flashy and doesn't seem very Kate-like. One more week until Princess Charlotte's Christening. I can't wait to see how she has grown and what Kate wears!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. I just can't with the spiky fringe tiaras. I love the floral type. But lots of people feel differently, and that's what makes the blogosphere fun. :-)

      Delete
    2. I like that one as well. It's delicate and feminine looking.

      Delete
    3. Julia from Leominster28 June 2015 at 03:17

      I actually love the fringe tiaras - they have such a history - not just with the British royal family but as a tiara style in general and the the queen now has the best examples I believe. I hope Kate loves them too because there are two of them - the Alexandra Kokoshink as well.

      Delete
    4. Just when I think I have seen all the tiaras that the British Royals have, I find another one, or two, or three. I am not complaining. I love tiaras and wore one myself as my neighbors and I watched the Royal wedding. (mine was from the wedding section at Walmart and I had to skirmish to get that. It was the last one. Must have been a run on them for the Royal wedding.) I will wear it for Harry's
      wedding. I am ready. :)
      My point was, I am surprised at how many tiaras they have (along with their other jewels) and just think of all the bling they probably have still in their vaults. They keep clothing from past monarchs for centuries, even Queen Elizabeth II's ring with a picture of
      Ann Boleyn in it. Would that someone would find favor and photograph all their bling. Can you imagine what a coffee table book that would be?



      Delete
    5. The Alexandra Kokoshink Tiara is
      superb as far as tiaras go. It is so similar to the Mary's Fringe tiara but I wouldn't turn either one of them down. I think Kate would look lovely in either of them. I certainly hope she designs a lot of pieces during her royal lifetime.

      Delete
    6. Julia from Leominster29 June 2015 at 06:47

      That would be wonderful. There have been some recent books but none have absolutely everything and they don't always agree.

      Sadly, I think the royal jewels were lost during the time of the Commonwealth. More were lost when Victoria came to the throne with the England/Hannover split - I believe Hannover was governed by Salic law and that wouldn't permit female inheritance - correct me if I'm wrong someone. So the majority of royal jewels date from Victoria's time or later - with some important exceptions of course.

      Delete
  8. Maggie - Minneapolis26 June 2015 at 08:18

    Also is Sophie wearing no makeup on her wedding day? Because that's what it looks like and I love it!! But I find that hard to believe (not because she needs makeup but just because I don't know many woman brave enough to marry a Prince in front of thousands without some makeup on). Either way, even if there is makeup, it's very light and I really like it. To be completely honest, I never liked Kate's wedding makeup - too harsh for my tastes, especially with the way her hair was pulled back. Sophie looks softer and more natural imo.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree, reportedly she decided to do her hair and makeup herself that day, but I really wish she would have let a professional makeup artist do it. Although I'm still skeptical that she did it herself. Knowing that there will be literally billions of people watch around the world I would have been a nervous wreck and would have been shaking profusely, I couldn't fathom doing something so important like that on my own.
      I think that was just a rumor put out to start the "she's just like us" pr. Lol.
      Lots of people have commented that her wedding makeup was too harsh, but the Middleton women are known for their love of thick black eyeliner.

      Delete
    2. I just have one point in favor of the heavy eyeliner. It definitely helps emphasize your eyes from far away and those that just got a glimpse of Kate from yards away may have been able to see her eyes better.

      Delete
    3. Maggie - Minneapolis29 June 2015 at 01:58

      Darla - that's completely fair, although I think Kate does the eyeliner wrong because it ends up making her eyes smaller, rather than just emphasizing them. I wish she wouldn't do her eyeliner around her entire eyes - if she left some open space they wouldn't look so closed off, even if she kept it just as thick. That being said, it wasn't just her eyeliner that seemed off to me. It was the entire look - combined with how tightly her hair was pulled back. It just didn't look like HER, you know? Even when she does really heavy eyeliner for her appearances now, her makeup in general still looks more natural than it did at the wedding, in my opinion. I agree with Blair that she should have let a professional do it, because there are ways to do your makeup to make sure you are seen from a large distance while not overdoing it for those near you. Movie stars have to deal with that problem all the time.
      Blair - I think what they ended up saying is that there was a makeup artist there in case they needed help, but that Kate did most of her makeup herself. I can believe that, because I'd like to think a makeup artist would have done the makeup less harshly.

      I will say this - Kate's heavy makeup helped provide some very lovely shots of her from behind the veil. And in general, she still looked amazing.

      Delete
  9. Thanks Charlotte for the very informative post. To be honest I am not crazy about tiaras but certainly I understand now why people are so interested in them. I also loved the first photo of the post, I have never seen it before, I wonder if Kate has ever seen it because there is so much behind that photo, the veil, her excitement, voww, great shot!!!!!

    Also I must share my future excitement of any events she is gonna attend, evening dresses are always so much fun!!!

    Last but not least for royal fans the queen always deliver her best, on fashion front and on official one as well. Her tour in Germany is awesome especially at her age!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Queen's jewelry p0rn is the best. The rubies she wore the other day, and that sapphire brooch!! Not my style on a personal level -- not that I'll ever own anything like that anyway -- but truly spectactular.

      Delete
    2. The sapphire brooch was Prince Albert's wedding gift to Queen Victoria, and therefore it has a German relevance. The Queen wears it frequently. There is some debate about the rubies, but they may also be Queen Victoria's and may have been set at Albert's direction. They definitely look splendid with the German ribbon the Queen wore at the state banquet.

      Delete
    3. The Queen "deploys" her jewels
      as one posted on here. Walk softly
      and carry (wear) a BIG bit of bling.

      Delete
    4. I completely agree with you, Bluhare. I saw the pic. She can get away with any jewellery:-)
      I also saw her outfit change when she visited Bergen-Bergen. She changed her lovely yellow coat to a stunning but appropriate black!! I hope she will be a role model to Kate in the future at that sense.

      Delete
    5. Julia from Leominster29 June 2015 at 01:29

      I agree, I thought that was brilliantly done. I noticed she had the same dark dress underneath and just a touch of trim on the yellow to tie in. She looked just right at such a sad place.

      Delete
  10. I feel like it is ironic this is a "Kate Loves" post, as for the most part it seems that Kate indeed DOESN'T love to wear the megawatt jewels available to her. I'm sure she personally selected the Scroll because of its lower profile and less ostentatious appearance. Given attitudes toward the monarchy and the fact that there are already so many tiaras in the Royal Collection and the Queen's own collection, I am not surprised at all that Kate didn't receive a new tiara at the time of her wedding.

    I, for one, think that she could pull off many of the more significant pieces of the collection, including the Lover's Knot, but don't believe she will do so any time soon. It's just not her style (at the moment) and we'll all just have to dream about Katherine tiara appearances for the time being.

    I wish there was a better picture of her in the Papyrus. Her dark hair makes tiaras pop so beautifully.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Sarah from Calif.26 June 2015 at 14:08

    Lovely, lovely !
    Thank you for this informative post.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Thanks Charlotte for the lovely post.....the tiaras are all exquisite. I agree with Leekheka, it would be nice if the Queen would have one of her many heirloom pieces redesigned into a tiara for Catherine. I would also like to see Catherine become "Princess Catherine" instead of the clunky moniker "The Duchess of Cambridge". She deserves it!

    Have a great weekend!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's not a question of deserving - it's just the way titles work. She has taken her husband's title, that's all. The European monarchies have a different approach, and their married-ins are all Princesses, but that doesn't happen in the UK.

      Delete
    2. Julia from Leominster28 June 2015 at 03:21

      Yes, the only exception was Alice of Gloucester where the queen gave particular permission, so there would not be a muddle with her daughter-in-law. Kate at least stands to be Princess of Wales someday while Harry's future wife will most likely always be a royal duchess - and Sophie a countess or possibly duchess. It does make a nice distinction between royal born ladies (and gentlemen) and otherwise. I sometimes think titles are handed out a bit too freely in Sweden - just my opinion.

      Delete
    3. Rebecca - Sweden29 June 2015 at 09:07

      I get what you're saying Julia. But there is a big difference. We have no nobility in Sweden so if they don't get a prince/princess title they have none at all. (The duke and such are more curtsy titles) In the UK if you're not created a princess you still have another title.

      Delete
  13. Thanks for a great new post Charlotte!! I love all of the Tiaras, and all of them will look great of her. Hopefully she has the chance to wear them out more!
    Hopefully we can see her at Wimbledon soon!
    Thanks again for the post Charlotte, you helped ease the withdrawals! ;)

    ReplyDelete
  14. Erika from Massachusetts26 June 2015 at 15:50

    Lots of pretty pretty jewels! Who doesn't love a tiara? My favorites are the Spencer tiara and the Strathmore Rose. They are exquisite. The video of Diana walking up the aisle on her wedding day with the tiara reflecting all the light is breathtaking. It simply glittered and sparkled continously.

    I prefer the Papyrus over the Halo although Im not a big fan of a huge jewel set high right in the center of the tiara. It feels dated and old fashioned to me. Although the DoC looked amazing in the Halo, I thought the Papyrus would have been a better choice. The Halo is so understated that I felt it disappeared under the veil while the lace work and intricate design of her dress competed with it. A dress of all one material in a more sleek design would have flattered the Halo better. Anyway, hope to see her in any tiara soon!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Canadian Friend26 June 2015 at 17:26

    Hi, Charlotte,

    Thanks for another interesting post!

    Does anyone else find it a bit poignant that the Queen Mother didn't like the Halo tiara or the Papyrus necklace (then made into a tiara instead)? Both were gifts from her husband and she liked neither!

    Maybe Royal marriages aren't all that different from those of ordinary folks...just with more expensive tokens. Maybe it really isn't the tokens that count since George VI and the QM really did appear to have a loving and supportive partnership.

    I also find it rather revealing that the Queen bought Fergie a new tiara-quite the gift. I think the Queen genuinely liked Fergie and had high hopes for the Yorks. Too bad they didn't work out...unless you believe the speculation that they may remarry once Prince Phillip is gone.

    No matter the level of scrutiny on these relationships, we still don't really know what the actual story is nor should we.

    Have a good weekend everyone!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Does anyone know what happened to Fergie's tiara and matching necklace?

      Delete
    2. Has Camilla already worn the Cambridge Lovers Knot tiara?
      (please tell me it isn't so)

      Delete
    3. Rebecca - Sweden27 June 2015 at 01:06

      Anon 23.09 My guess is she is saving it and it will be given to one of her daughters.

      Anon 23.18 No she hasn't and I doubt she ever will since she has bigger tiaras at her disposal and later will have full roam of the vaults.

      Delete
    4. Camilla has not worn that tiara, and I'd bet everything I own that she never will. She's got plenty in her own jewelry box!.

      Delete
    5. Sarah fergusns tiara and necklace were stolen from an airport a few years ago when she was traveing to the USA. They were subsequently recovered and according to her daughters they are at royal lodge and remain in sarahs possession.

      Delete
  16. Such a great post! I don't usually comment, but I had to this time. More posts like these would be great to see in between Kate sightings. You could do more jewels, wedding dresses, gowns, etc. from past royals. I love seeing how their styles have evolved.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I read your Royal Digest blog post about Diana's 'Cambridge Lovers Knot Tiara' and think it was very distasteful for Camilla to wear it as she has several times. It seems disrespectful to its original--and intended--owner given the circumstances with the two women and Charles.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When has Camilla worn the Cambridge Lovers Knot Tiara? As far as I know, no one has worn it since Diana.

      Delete
    2. Kate, Texas, USA26 June 2015 at 21:51

      I completely agree. Definitely not a tiara that Camilla should wear. There are many others for her to choose from.

      Delete
    3. PLEASE Camilla, do not be arrogant enough to wear the Cambridge Lovers Knot Tiara. Just be satisfied knowing all the others are fair game and that you have your family tiara that the king gave his mistress, your grandmother.
      Let the Cambridge tiara be worn by the
      the Duchess and Princess of Cambridge, Diana's daughter-in-law and granddaughter. You have already
      worn Diana's Prince of Wales pin (some say that might be a replica but I doubt that). Just leave it at that. any money they have spent on getting the British Commonwealth to accept you
      will be undone if you show up wearing Diana's Iconic Cambridge Lovers Knot tiara. Think before you rock those rocks Camilla.

      Delete
    4. Sadly, Camilla has worn Diana's Cambridge Lovers Knot tiara at least twice. What an arrogant and insensitive thing to do IMHO. Has the woman no scruples? Just like wearing the Prince of Wales pin Prince Charles had designed for Diana. Diana wore that many times. I just find it hard to believe that Camilla had the audacity to wear those and even before she is
      on the throne. Tacky thing to do, very tacky. When people see her in that tiara they have to think of Diana and they think again about who is currently wearing Diana's tiara. Yuck

      Delete
    5. If I were Kate, I would not wear any tiara Camilla has worn. I would have simple new ones made or others reconfigured. They most likely have a phlethora of loose gems to choose from. She will probably pick or design a simple one to become her statement piece or go to anyway. She could ask
      William to gift her with a beautiful one.
      I think she would wear that as often as possible. Please William rescue Kate from Camilla's "I finally made it and now I'll flaunt it" tiara tyranny. (hurry)

      Delete
    6. Sofy-- google "Cambridge Lover's Knot Tiara camilla"

      Delete
    7. Rebecca - Sweden27 June 2015 at 01:08

      Uhm, no she hasnt?! THere are ohotoshopped pictures out there but she has used her family tiara, the Deli Duhbar and the Greville honeycombe tiara and is rumoured to also have the Treck cresent tiara on loan. But I have never seen or heard anything more that photoshopped fakes about the Cambridge lovers knot.

      Delete
    8. Rebecca - Sweden27 June 2015 at 01:11

      Also, she hasn't worn a Prince of Wales pin designed for Diana. First of all, there is no such thing. Diana wore a Prince of Whales pin that was given to an earlier princess of wales. Camilla has also worn one that looks almost the same, but it's actually another that was designed for ANOTHER princess of wales. They are a symbol of being married to the Prince of Wales and they are two different pins!

      Delete
    9. You're kidding! Glad I didn't bet anyone that she'd never worn it! That really surprises me. She's got plenty of really blingy ones to pick from.

      Delete
    10. Camilla has never worn the Lovers knot tiara. She has worn the Dehli Duhbar, Boucheron and her own family tiara. Also Charles had multiple Prince of Wales brooches made for close friends including Camilla. Im not sure where you are getting your information from.

      Delete
    11. Anon 23:38 Please supply dates and places that Camilla has worn the Lovers' Knot tiara! I have never heard of that, and I read the Royal Jewels Board and the British Royals Board every day.

      The brooch/pendant with the Prince of Wales feathers was a wedding gift to Queen Alexandra when she became Princess of Wales. It has been worn by the subsequent Princesses of Wales, and Camilla is spouse of the Prince of Wales now.

      Delete
    12. I believe the pictures on the Internet of Camilla wearing the Lovers' Knot tiara are photoshopped. They should be labeled PHOTOMONTAGE, right across the image.

      Delete
    13. Oh, my mistake! I apologize, it didn't occur to me that the images weren't accurate.

      Delete
    14. The site linked below clearly states that one of these images of Camilla wearing the Lovers' Knot tiara is photoshopped. And then the same thing is explained repeatedly in the comments after that article!

      http://www.princess-diana-remembered.com/william--kate-news/which-royal-tiara-will-end-up-on-kates-head

      The other image I have seen is even less real looking. There are sites that also identify it as a fake. At least one photoshopped image of Kate wearing the Lovers' Knot tiara is floating around, and it is also a hoax, or someone experimenting with how it would look on her. These things need to be carefully labeled; otherwise they go viral and confuse everyone.

      Delete
    15. ANON @ 01:51
      Thanks, I didn't know that. That's a relief really. Thanks
      ANON @ 02:01 Apparently those are photoshopped. so, that's good news.
      Thanks


      Delete
    16. Courtnee, obviously I was given misinformation. Thanks

      Delete
    17. What a relief about Camilla and the tiara and the pin. Thanks you guys. :)
      There certainly is some misinformation out there and apparently some who want to present Camilla in the wrong light. I am so relieved that she DOES
      have better sense than to wear that tiara and that the pin is really hers personally and not a Diana one. whew,
      huge relief.

      Delete
    18. I too believe the photo of Camilla wearing the Lover's Knot tiara was photoshopped. Perhaps more to do with size than good taste (Camilla seems to prefer the larger tiara worn by the QM).

      But I am pretty sure the PoW brooch is the one worn by Diana. It's a silent yet pointed message on Camilla's part. How very considerate of William and Harry's feelings.

      Delete
    19. I hope it isn't Alexandra's brooch....Edward VII's wife...now worn by a relative of the woman who carried on
      a years-long affair with her husband. Now that WOULD be twisted. And maybe a bit of a raspberry to the
      royal family.

      Delete
    20. Rebecca - Sweden27 June 2015 at 20:00

      This is the reason I always put "Photoshopped" when I do montauges like that, that can be misinterpreted... Btw... Both pictures looks very phtoshopped to a "trained eye". Just look at the difference in light and shadows.

      Delete
    21. Camilla has NOT worn the CLK tiara. There are photoshopped pictures around of it on her head, but she has not worn it. I'm sure she would have more sense!

      Delete
    22. Royal jewels are handed down as well as remade. It is not surprising Camilla would wear things owned by prior Princesses of Wales and queens. Kate will have them when she's Princess of Wales and queen as well. That's just how it's done.

      Delete
    23. 99, yes, Camilla has worn pieces that belonged to Queen Alexandra. And while she may be entitled to do so as Charles' wife, it doesn't necessarily equal good taste, especially if some pieces were worn by Diana. But I truly believe Camilla wears them with pride, as if to say, *I* made it (beyond her great grandmother's role and despite her own role in the C&D's marriage).

      Delete
    24. The Teck crescents tiara would be beautiful on Kate, though it would get lost on Camilla. I hope it is one of the tiaras that still reside at Clarence House, and Kate may be able to use it.

      Delete
    25. Maggie - Minneapolis28 June 2015 at 03:08

      Royalfan - for someone who is so insistent that everyone sees the positive in Kate, and doesn't assume negative things, I find it especially ironic that you so "truly believe" that Camilla wears these things out of pride, rather than just because she is the wife of the Prince of Wales, despite having no real reason to believe that. If someone implied a motive like this about Kate, you would jump down their throats in a heartbeat. If Kate wore the Cambridge Lovers' Knot, someone could say that she's wearing it just to say "I made it, beyond all of my commoner ancestors." Some people in fact do say that's why she's always holding her hands in a way that showcases Diana's ring on her finger. I don't agree with that, but I also know that you'd express your disagreement even more vehemently than I would.
      I find it ridiculous that Camilla should avoid every piece worn by Diana. The items are associated with being the wife of the Prince of Wales. Camilla is now the wife of the Prince of Wales. It's that simple. And you know what else is simple? Charles is the one who cheated on Diana, NOT Camilla. Could Camilla have helped Diana out by not being the "other woman," but ultimately, the cheating is on Charles, not Camilla. Remember that Camilla would have married Charles if it weren't for the royal family deeming her unsuitable. I hope (and think) that she does regret hurting Diana, but it's not that cut and dry. People make mistakes. That doesn't mean they don't deserve to wear the jewels deserving of their position. I already think it's kind of silly that Camilla can't be Princess Camilla, but PR wise I get why they made that decision, and hope that she is named Queen. For goodness sakes, if William can live in a mansion renowned for being where Camilla and Charles met for their secret trysts, then I think it's safe to assume that he or Harry will not be offended by Camilla wearing a jewel that was never Diana's, but rather, belongs to the current Princess of Wales, and was perhaps worn by Diana a few times.
      Mostly, I just think it's pure sexism to put the blame on the "other woman," rather than the man who was actually cheating on his wife. It's the same stuff that you say is sexist when the discussion is about Carole, royalfan. It portrays the "other woman" as manipulative and in control, and the one who should be punished. Charles cheated. Not Camilla.

      Delete
    26. Julia from Leominster28 June 2015 at 03:25

      I agree Royalfan - and along with jewels being passed along, there is an issue of good taste as well. I remember there was some controversy in one of the countries - sturggling to remember which one - about jewels that passed from a one time heir who lost his position due to marriage. When the jewels came back into the royal family - they weren't worn much until after his death. Somehow, I feel it was Sweden, but that doesn't seem quite right - too late to research right now.

      Delete
    27. Royal Fan,
      I agree that a lot of Camilla's impetus to continue in a relationship with Charles
      outside of both of their marriages was to somehow make sure Alice Keppler's
      bloodline would legitimately make it to the throne. King Edward did invite Alice to sit next to him at state dinners and even sat her beside himself and the Archbishop of Westminster. It is reported that she helped him with
      many decisions of import. Couple
      that with the fact that she must have
      known that Charle's decision to go
      off with the Navy and not marry her
      or even prevent her from marrying
      someone else, must have been
      because the palace did not deem
      her marriage material. I think it
      must have been especially poignant
      for Camila to have Prince Charles
      hold her granddaughter (Alice's
      great-great granddaughter) as they
      stood on the Royal balcony after
      William and Kate's wedding. There
      must be something to all that as
      Charles is helping her accumulate
      Alice's jewelry. I do think Charles
      and Camilla love each other and
      heaven knows they did humble
      themselves before God, the church
      and the world so they could freshly
      enter holy matrimony. I wish them
      all the best. (I, too, just don't want
      to see Camilla wear the Cambridge
      tiara.)
















      Delete
    28. Camilla's great grandmother was Alice Keppel, not Keppler.

      Delete
    29. Leo, my book's out on loan, but if I remember correctly, there was a big disagreement between the German Hanovers and British Hanovers (?) when someone got married around Queen Victoria's time. Is that what you're thinking about? They had to split up the jewelry which is why a lot of the European royals have some.

      Delete
    30. Maggie, I have lost track of the number of times I have stated that I do not "insist" that all comments about Kate be positive and there have been plenty of negative ones I have not responded to.

      The subject of this post is jewelry, Camilla came up in the conversation, and I expressed my opinion ("I believe"). I do try to emphasize "I believe" or "I think" in my posts. *I* did not condemn someone or something as being "ridiculous" or state emphatically that it's "that simple", as you have done.

      Regarding what you consider "especially ironic", may I point out that I do not follow a blog devoted to Camilla and post mostly negative comments about her. If I did, I would expect someone to wonder about MY motives as I have done here periodically.

      The irony, in my humble opinion, is in voluntarily following a blog about someone/something you're not very impressed with.

      Delete
    31. Anon 4:12, it was a significant moment. I agree. This was Charles and Camilla's Christmas card in 2011...

      http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/12/08/article-0-0F1AB2FF00000578-884_634x446.jpg

      Delete
    32. Royal Fan,
      I think you are always fair in your posts
      and very nicely balanced, even in your comments concerning Camilla. :)

      Delete
    33. Keppel, keppel, thanks Bluhare.

      Delete
    34. I follow this blog because I care about the position Kate holds in the royal family. She will be Princess of Wales and queen one day. What she does has an impact. Therefore my comments reflect that. I am not a fan of Kate as a person. I'm a fan of the position she holds. I would suspect that some people who comment on blogs about Camilla may feel the same way.

      Delete
    35. Maggie, I understand why you feel that way. It does seem that the man rarely has to take as much flack as the woman in an affair situation. I do believe though that Camilla could have put a stop to it anytime she wanted.
      I know when I was single and approached by married men (say yuck three times), they got the message of back off really fast. The thought of a married man cheating on his wife AND children probably made my response REALLY clear. :) Just wish Camilla had done the same thing and told him to seek counseling with Diana and a good counselor. But she didn't. The lure of a throne can be a very powerful thing, particularly given Camilla's history. And, I do think Charles has always loved her. That is also a powerful draw. Even at that, had she made it clear to Charles that she would not be the third person in his marriage he would have stopped pursuing her.

      Delete
    36. Julia from Leominster29 June 2015 at 01:40

      I would say Maggie, that Charles is greatly to blame for allowing Camilla's involvment in his marriage and not working harder to save it. What bothers me about Camilla is that she wasn't just a mistress who came along (and of course she was unfaithful to her own husband) it is that she involved herself with Diana and put herself in the Wales' marriage. Yes Charles should have told her to get the hell out but she is said to have contacted Diana when Charles wasn't around.

      Interesting about the idea of Mrs Keppel as Mrs Keppel is the one who said about the Duchess of Windsor "We did it better in my day." Royal mistresses in her opinion should not presume to become wives, so I don't think she would feel any fondness for her descendant. Given that, for Charles to buy Camilla Keppel jewels is just plain silly but Camilla brings out the silliness in him.

      I have never seen Camilla as sincere and that is the main reason I find her so despictable - I suspect she promoted Charles' romance with Diana - a teenaged girl thinking she would find her an easy target. And so she did. I don't know that the marriage would ever have worked but Camilla's presence in it in the early days got if off to a very bad start.

      Delete
    37. Maggie - Minneapolis29 June 2015 at 02:08

      Royalfan - you're right. I was rude in my post to you, and for that I apologize.
      I will say - I don't really understand this distinction between Kate and Camilla that you're making based on this blog being about Kate and not Camilla. So it's okay to assume negative things about someone as long as that is not the person we are focusing on? That seems arbitrary to me. For one thing - you often say Kate is bullied online, including on this blog. You've said many times that people insist on saying negative things based on assumptions about Kate, and how that isn't fair. How are you not bullying Camilla then? Is your definition of bullying really that it's only bullying if it's something negative about the person the blog is about? Because in my opinion, that doesn't make much sense. Bullying is bullying, regardless of whom the blog is about. Personally, I don't think you're bullying Camilla. But if I agreed with the way you seem to set a standard for bullying based on what you've said about Kate, then I think you meet your own standards and ARE bullying Camilla.
      Lastly - I maybe don't say "I think" or "in my opinion" enough, except that in my head, that's always implied, for when I'm writing my own comments or reading the comments of others. Isn't almost everything we say on here an opinion? We know very little about Kate or any other member of the royal family. I just thought it's assumed/accepted that I don't think what I'm saying is fact. But I'm sorry if it doesn't come off that way.

      Delete
    38. Maggie - Minneapolis29 June 2015 at 02:09

      GAHHH I really need to think more before I hit publish so I stop with the multiple posts :P

      bluhare - omg that sums up my own interest in Kate so well! Frankly, I've struggled with how to explain it, and you just did it perfectly (and used about 3829038102983 less words than I would have :P) so thank you!!!

      Delete
    39. bluhare- I can't believe anyone would question your motive for taking part in this blog. Most of the time,
      your comments are interesting and fair, if not down right funny. I don't think there is a person who
      comments regularly on this blog who is 100% fair and reasonable all the time. We , most of us, have our
      cranky, hair-trigger moments. For which we are promptly and justly chastised.
      I think the point was going on a Camilla fan blog and consistently finding fault. One might question one's motive for taking part in the blog.Then I have to stop and try
      to think if there are Camilla fan blogs. I know the jewels and hats she wears have fans.
      I hope I haven't blundered my way into a discussion, without properly understanding it.
      But that hasn't stopped me before. ha!

      Delete
    40. Julia from Leominster29 June 2015 at 07:02

      Bluhare - I agree I too am a fan of the position - that doesn't mean I don't like Kate - just that my interest is in how she fullfills her royal role.

      Now to clarify the muddle I made. I was talking about the Swdish royal family. The tiara in question was a ruby one - the Edward VII one that was given to Margaret of Connaught. She left it to her second son Sigvard - and he was stripped of his title for marrying a commoner (how times change!) The tiara went back to the royal family but there was a muddle (all the muddles aren't mine) about whether it was a loan or a gift. Eventually - it got sorted and the royal family bought it but Silvia didn't wear the the tiara until after Sigvard's death. Here's the link for a more coherant discussion http://www.thecourtjeweller.com/2015/03/saturday-sparkler-king-edward-vii-ruby.html

      I mentioned what you're thinking of above - the split of Hannover from Britain when Victoria became queen - due to Salic law she could reign in Hannover - I think. A lot of the jewels from the Hannovarians went back to Germany at that point - so the British royal family does not have a large colleciton of old pieces - other than a few major ones. The Commonwealth took care of a lot of them too.

      Delete
    41. Marion from Germany29 June 2015 at 14:28

      Maggie from Minneapolis, spot on! I appreciate your arguments in favour of Camilla and agree with you 100%. You seem to be able to see things from different perspectives, in this case Camilla's difficult situation. Your statement shows common sense, fairness and also understanding for others. I like that.

      Delete
    42. Maggie, Camilla's role in the breakdown of Charles and Diana's marriage can not be understated. While it is true that Charles did the cheating and is ultimately to blame, there is sufficient evidence that Camilla was watching over his shoulder from day one guiding the marriage and lending her proverbial shoulder to Charles when needed. Her own marriage was falling apart and Andrew was a well-known philanderer himself.
      The cheating that you speak of, where a marriage breaks apart and the two parties drift and one party ends up cheating : that is probably not exactly what happened here. Charles was in love with Diana when they married - there is enough photographic evidence to suggest that initially they had fun together and he loved her. When they hit their rough patch I believe that Camila's careful manipulation of Charles did steer him away from the marriage, when, if she had chosen to remain uninvolved he may have decided to work on it. Yes, ultimately Charles did cheat and he is ultimately responsible for Diana's memory. But Camilla played a wily if not malicious part in their marriage and that is the reason that many feminists of that age do hold her responsible. It is not a simple black and white case of mysogyny. So I would urge you to consider this viewpoint.

      Royalfan: I agree with you that that particular photograph was indeed released to drive home a point. There was some kerfuffle with Camilla during the wedding - if you watch the videos there was some heated gesticulation by Camilla as she and Charles were entering the church. Maybe someone said something, who knows. And then they go ahead and release this picture. And this from Charles - a man who can not be arsed enough to pick up his own grandson. Of course this was a message. Loud and clear.

      I do think Charles will make a good monarch, possibly better that ER II. But he is totally and completely under Camilla's thumb. What he lacked in a mother he got back ten fold from Camilla. And it has been that way since the seventies.

      Delete
  18. Also, Charlotte's christening is in just over one week!!!! So excited!!!! :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just had to say something funny about the christening. I dreamed about it last night and Kate was wearing her wedding dress down these steps to the church! Ha! I thought that was hilarious when I woke up, but my14 year old son didn't share my mirth so I had to share it here. I don't know what church my brain was conjuring up for steps to be going down to the entrance. Weird! They were also allowing cameras in the church and I "saw" a couple smiles from Princess Charlotte. Wishful thinking!

      Delete
    2. I know how you feel, my husband roles his eyes everytime I mention anything royal, including wacky dreams!

      Delete
    3. my family teases me big time about my interest in the Royal family. :)

      Delete
  19. Queen Elizabeth II wedding tiara looks fit for a monarch. The rest look like they can be replicated, old fashioned or antique like Sophie's.

    1. The Queen’s wedding tiara 2. Diana’s Spencer tiara
    3. Kate's (Kate’s because it blended beautifully with her veil, she carried it very well and it did not upstage the delicate intricacy of the lace). Her wedding dress lace is more original, credit to her in making the pattern, the flowers of the four territories of Britain. What had consistently made Kate stand out in fashion is, she wears it, instead of the out wear (whatever that might be wear her).

    By the way, when monarchies get abolished or fed away, the glory of tiaras also does in that country and custom/including imitations for brides and bridesmaids. In the world of fairy tales and /or existing monarchy, curious to see a millennium tiara (may be Kate will design one, wear it and pass it on to her daughter).

    ReplyDelete
  20. The Queen still occasionally wears her grandmother's fringe tiara, which was made from stones in the tiara Queen Victoria gave Queen Mary, then Duchess of York, to wear at her wedding. The Queen and Princess Anne both wore the newer fringe tiara as their wedding tiara. It was rebuilt sometime between those weddings, and looks much sturdier now than it did when Princess Elizabeth wore it.

    The papyrus tiara seems to have been a loan to Princess Margaret. There is some indication that it was retrieved from the Queen Mother's vault when Lady Serena wore it at her wedding. Her tall hair style indicated that she had intended to wear Princess Margaret's own Poltimore tiara (later sold at auction). If so, something happened to change that, perhaps a problem with the fragile Poltimore, and the papyrus was sent for. Perhaps it still resides at Clarence House.

    It is said that the Strathmore rose tiara, which has not been worn in public since the 1930s, is also in fragile condition. It is very pretty, but perhaps needs to be rebuilt and adapted for wearing across the head instead of the forehead. I would like to see it worn.

    Camilla usually wears the Queen Mother's Greville tiara, and occasionally her own family's pretty tiara. Once she wore the Delhi Durbar tiara. When she is princess or queen consort, she will have access to quite a collection of major tiaras. And some of the less grand tiaras in the collection will probably become Kate's choices.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is interesting that four generations in consecutive order of ages wore the Halo Tiara in less than 100 years. W&C’s daughter might be the fifth generation who will wear it. Another plus of having a girl for the couple is the jewels could pass to the blood line of the monarch. All the women wore it well in their youth.

      Delete
    2. I've read that the Strathmore has two frames - one for use as a bandeau and one for a more conventional position atop the head.

      Delete

    3. The Strathmore Rose Tiara is the closest of the ones posted here that could work out for Kate.

      Delete
    4. I hope you are right about the two Strathmore frames, Cath. That would be a lovely tiara for Kate for slightly less formal occasions.

      Delete
  21. I think Kate chose the halo tiara for her wedding because the motifs look a bit like oak leaves, and therefore it goes with her acorn earrings. Also perhaps because it is pretty but fairly unobtrusive. I would like to see a full picture of her wearing the papyrus tiara!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @Anon 19:56. Im always forgetting about the earrings, perhaps because we haven't seen them again. Yes, I suspect you are are right about the choice of the Halo to coordinate with the earrings.

      Delete
    2. I'd be inclined to think it was the other way round - that her parents commissioned the earrings to go with the tiara.

      Delete
    3. Yes, I think the earrings were designed to match the tiara, but both were chosen to honor the new coat of arms of Kate's father, which features oak leaves.

      Delete
    4. I think for sure they did. The acorn corresponds to the acorns on Kate's coat of arms that was created during the time of the wedding. Pippa's earrings that she wore for the wedding were designed at that time also as was
      Carole's necklace and earrings she wore for the wedding and the ensemble she wore to the wedding reception.
      Michael and James wore new diamond
      tie tacs designed at the same time as
      all the above.

      Delete
    5. Chicken and the egg stuff! I always assumed that the design of the earrings preceeded the tiara choice but, of course, it may be the other way around.

      Delete
    6. The motifs on the halo tiara are really supposed to be feathers, I think, but they do look like new oak leaves, too. Thus Kate honored both her family and William's by choosing to wear the tiara, and its small size was appropriate as well.

      Delete
  22. Kate, Texas, USA26 June 2015 at 21:46

    Ohhh, I loved this post! All the tiaras are so beautiful and exquisite! I enjoyed reading the history of each piece. Kate did look amazing on her wedding day and every inch the royal bride. I thought the Halo tiara was perfect for the occasion and a perfect fit for Kate. I would love to see her in the Cambridge Lovers Knot. It is gorgeous! I guess we can dream and hopefully look forward to William and Kate attending the state dinner in October. Lovely gown and tiara...yes!!!! In the meantime, Princess Charlotte's christening is coming up!

    Thank you for the wonderful and informative post! Have a great weekend!

    ReplyDelete
  23. I think that Kate will only wear her diamond weddings with the wedding tiara together since the earrings were designed to match the tiara.
    or, she might have just have decided that her wedding was so historically huge and spectacular that the earrings and tiara will
    only be for that special day. They are part of history now and perhaps she has chosen to keep that that way. Perhaps

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. oops, her diamond earrings

      Delete
  24. Has anyone seen Pippa wear her weddings earrings since the wedding?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Hello!

    Just to clarify, Camilla has never worn the Cambridge Lovers Knot Tiara. There are several photoshopped photos on the internet though.

    Thank you for your comments :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Phew! I thought I logged on to an alternate universe for a minute.

      Delete
    2. Thank heaven. Thanks for the clarification Charlotte. The photoshopping was done convincingly. Let's hope she continues to not wear that tiara.

      Delete
    3. I was sure that was the case.
      Camilla might be a lot of things, but stupid is NOT one of them. She (and Charles) is very aware that her wearing this tiara would create and outrage and destroy her chance of becoming queen, which I believe both she and Charles want. It’s the same reason she isn’t styled by her primary title ‘Princess of Wales’, but uses one of Charles’s secondary titles ‘Duke of Cornwall’.

      Delete
    4. I have read that Charles is procuring for Camilla at great effort and expense,
      the Jewelry from her grandmother,
      Alice Keppler, mistress to Charles ancestor, King Edward, much of that had been given to her by King Edward. She already had a few pieces that had come through her mother from her grandmother. So I am glad that she has not worn Princess Diana's tiara.
      She has many, many other options
      including the Jewelry in the Royal vaults and from Queen Elizabeth's
      vast collection no doubt.

      Delete
    5. Maryland Moxie29 June 2015 at 10:56

      That's actually very sweet of Charles if it's true. He obviously realizes that after his death, Camilla will have no status within the royal family and will lose access to the royal jewels that she now enjoys. In this way, he's leaving her bloodline some personal historical connection to the royal family. It's uncharted territory for an UK Monarch to widow a spouse who is not parent to the heir. I think Henry VIII wife Catherine Parr was the last -- and that was before George III made the deal with Parliament regarding finances. The chance that Charles will pass before Camilla is why I don't think she'll get the title Queen - the UK would be left with a dowager Queen that had no blood ties to the new King and his consort. Camilla is not William's responsibility to worry about - the way the Queen Mother was to Elizabeth II and Queen Mary was to George VI. Now that I think about it, I really hope I live long enough to see how this all plays out.

      Delete
  26. I for one, would like to see the Duchess with Marie Feodorovna Sapphire Bandeau tiara. It would suit with her engagement ring. It's been ages in the vault, its time to bring it out again, don't you think?
    https://www.pinterest.com/pin/514114113686196562/

    Nice post, Charlotte. As always. -tz

    ReplyDelete
  27. Michelle in US27 June 2015 at 03:41

    Great post, Charlotte. I love tiaras. The Strathmore Rose Tiara is my favorite. I wish we had a better picture of HRH wearing the Papyrus Tiara. I know I'm getting way ahead of myself, but I'm waiting for the day when we see her at the State Opening of Parliament. I know it's years away, but I'm still picturing her in a lovely gown and a tiara with Prince William. Can't wait for Princess Charlotte Christening.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I strongly dislike Sophie's jewlrey. Shouldn't the Queen lend her one because she wouldn't have owned one... rather than a favorites thing? Diana's fit her dress perfectly...Leah, Missouri

    ReplyDelete
  29. I do still hope that William will gift Kate with her own tiara. Then, I believe, we would definitely get to see her in a tiara more often. Kate wears a lot of the same styles over and over again, including in her jewelry so I think she would stay with any tiara William would gift to her. Hopefully, he would let her help design that.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Julia from Leominster27 June 2015 at 06:56

    I personally prefer the historic tiaras and think there is a certain prestige in wearing them. However I don't know that I would make too much of what the royal ladies wore at their weddings.

    Diana was given the lover's knot (and later made to give it back.) She chose to wear the Spencer tiara to honour her own family. I remember how surprised we all were.

    Andrew is said to be the queen's favourite son and I suspect Sarah could have worn one of the older tiaras had that been the wish. I recall Andrew and Sarah chose to have a newly built house rather than an old one. (Another mess.) It may be it was Andrew's desire for her to have a new tiara of her own. If there was a reason why Sarah wore a new tiara other than that - it may have been more caution than liking or disliking. By that time, the Wales' marriage was in known to be in trouble and there may have been a reluctance to risk a tiara leaving the family through a marriage break-up.

    Sophie had been Edward's girlfriend much longer and may have been seen as more secure - and Edward took a little used tiara and partially redesigned it. I imagine it wouldn't have been seen as a great loss in the event of a divorce.

    I think it is less that Kate doesn't like jewels than the fact she hasn't completely as yet embraced royal working life. I thought her wedding tiara was perfect for her. I was surprised to see the Papyrus since I associated it with Princess Margaret but it seems it was a loan all along. I wonder if Serena didn't choose it, knowing there was a likihood the Poltimore would be sold when her mother-in-law died.

    I think Kate looks best in less fussy things (that diamond necklace she wore didn't suit her) so I wouldn't favour the Strathmore rose even if it was repaired. Because she is Duchess of Cambridge, it would seem appropriate for her to wear the Lover's Knot and I see no reason why she shouldn't wear something associated with Diana. (Unlike Camilla where it would obviously be inappropriate.)

    But I think the Queen Mary's Fringe would look wonderful on her - if she wore her hair up around it. The queen doesn't seem to wear it anymore - and while Princess Anne wore it on her wedding, I don't think she has worn it since. It would make a nice link to the future to loan it to Kate. (After Diana and the Danish tiara fiasco, I doubt a tiara will be given directly to Kate for some time.) But if Kate is going to wear her hair down - one of the smaller tiaras such as she has worn is best.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rebecca - Sweden27 June 2015 at 19:55

      I agree very much with this whole post.

      Delete
    2. I believe there was once a tradition that a bride wore a tiara from her own family for her wedding, and then wore the tiara(s) of her husband's family after marriage. Princess Anne may have partly followed that tradition, in that since her wedding she wears smaller tiaras from her grandmothers which are now hers, rather than borrowing from the Queen. Her daughter and daughter in law each wore one of those for their own weddings, and perhaps will have access to them in the future.

      Sophie has worn both the tiara made from parts of Queen Victoria's circlet, for her wedding and since, and other tiaras loaned to her by the Queen. I think she may own the beautiful necklace/tiara with the single large aquamarine, which she wears now and then for European weddings.

      Kate will no doubt wear the 'princess' tiaras as long as William is third in line. So far she has worn two tiaras that were the Queen Mother's when she was Duchess of York, and which were loaned to Anne and Margaret later on. Camilla wears one, and the Queen once wore the other, of the two tiaras the Queen Mother wore as a widow. There are several modern tiaras - ruby, sapphire, aquamarine, and emerald - that the Queen doesn't seem to wear now. It will be interesting to see, if I live that long, how the tiaras are deployed in the next reign.

      I don't know whether Queen Mary's small tiaras still exist. If so, they may be appropriate for Kate. But it seems to me that for now she and Camilla wear the tiaras that were at Clarence House during the Queen Mother's lifetime. The smaller Queen Mary tiaras might be in reserve for Beatrice, Eugenie, Louise and James's wife. Even though they do not perform royal duties, they will need tiaras for the next coronation.

      Delete
    3. Julia, google the Maria Feodorovna
      Sapphire Bandeau and let us know what you might think about that one for Kate? Wouldn't it be lovely for Wiiliam to gift Kate with a tiara of her own design also? And then have an oil portrait of her in that and a beautiful matching gown. History is yearning for that me thinks. Hopefully that particular destiny will be fulfilled sooner than later while she is still young.

      Delete
    4. Sorry, Leo. Having trouble understanding your rationale when you say Kate doesn't wear big jewels because she
      hasn't "embraced royal working life." How can you go from tiaras to Kate doesn't work enough. Quite a leap..
      I was hoping the topic of tiaras would ward off such comments.

      Delete
    5. 99

      Kate will not wear more tiaras until she and Will become full time royals. When that happens they will attend white tie state functions and at such events tiaras are worn by royals. Despite what some posters think, tiaras are not worn willy-nilly when one feels like putting on something sparkly, there are actually protocolar rules about dress codes.

      Delete
    6. 99,sooner or later, all roads lead to the work debate.
      Royalfan

      Delete
    7. Kate has only attended one event where the dress code called for a tiara. Had she been to more we'd have seen or heard more. So Leo's point is valid, I think.

      Delete
    8. Julia from Leominster28 June 2015 at 01:45

      Royalfan and others - it wasn't meant to be a comment about work but about involvement with royal life which isn't quite the same thing. Up until now that diplomatic reception has been the sole tiara event Kate has attended and on William and Kate's tours there has been a conscious avoiding of formal events. (And Kate looked very tense on the way to that diplomatic reception - although we have only car snaps.)

      Only twice has Kate worn a long gown on a tour - and one of those events was a Hollywood party. William and Kate could have attended the Singapore state visit banquet last October- it would have been a very natural thing after their visit there. Their absence was put down to Kate's H.G. but Kate attended another evening event (wearing the sexy Packham blue dress) around the same time.

      Without any editorial opnion being expressed on my part, William and Kate have made it clear that they are living a primarily private life. If Kate on her very rare formal occasions covered herself with royal jewels a la Camilla - it might really create a hypocritical impression. Whether I like the decisions William and Kate are making, I agree with what appears to be her present intent to keep jewellery at a mimimum. At this point, her role seems to be more mum than working princess and that is her choice.

      As someone who loves to see royal jewels out (with certain exceptions) I still think Kate is charting a wise course here of "less is more". Camilla's too eager embrace of royal jewels (including that iffy "are there two or one POW brooch/pendant) has not created the correct impression among many - she looks unpleasantly keen to flaunt her royal status and ends up looking like what she is - a royal mistress made good through tawdry circumstances. Kate who has ample beauty without jewels is right, I think, to stay with small amount of jewels until the time when she does regularly attend dinners and foreign tiara events.

      Diana threw herself into royal work and royal tiara wearing. Kate hasn't and I suspect we won't be seeing a lot in the future - although I hope the Chinese dinner in the autumn might bring one of the two tiaras she has worn up until now - or even something new. I think William and Kate don't really understand how much royal supporters want to see them looking well- royal. Not just like an ordinary bloke and his missus. I sometimes think he is playing to the doubtful about royals young - instead of established supporters (probably assuming other royals could cover that) and that could end up being a misstep. Remembering how young girls embraced Diana in all her princess glory - I think the British royals are making a mistake that other countries aren't so much of assuming royal pomp lacks youthful appeal.

      Delete
    9. Sofy-she wore the Papyrus to a white tie event. That is the protocol-white tie, medals, orders, tiaras.
      I believe. "royal working life" indicated portrait unveilings, hospital visits, etc. Not white tie events.
      What is the official definition of "full time royal?" Is a part-time royal only royal part of the time?
      None of that has anything to do with Catherine's personal jewellery preferences, which was the subject of
      the comment.

      Delete
    10. Julia from Leominster28 June 2015 at 03:09

      Anonymous 21:16, I believe you're right about brides wearing their family tiaras - it makes sense as long as your family happens to have one. But don't think there's any problem with borrowing one if your family doesn't have one - something borrowed is a tradition too.

      Anonymous 22:55, yes, I agree on Maria Feodorovna's tiara - it would be splendid - especially if paired with some of Diana's sapphire jewllery which I think would look splendid on Kate. Over on "From her Majesty's Jewel Vault there's a photo of one of the queen's necklaces she rarely wears - the Dubai looped Sapphire that would go maginficently with that tiara - I'm at a loss as why that one wasn't loaned to Kate to wear with her Packham gown instead of that fiddly Nizam one that didn't look right on her.

      One problem I suspect with necklaces is that Kate is so much taller than the queen who has had many necklaces shortened. Not a problem with tiaras.

      99- I responded more above but no, as far as royal tiara wearing events go, Kate hasn't embraced them - just one event in four years and a conscious avoiding of possible tiara events on royal tours. Don't know whose decison that is - William's Charle' or the Queen's but there it is.

      It's a slightly different issue than work - it relates more to involvement in tradtional royal events and a choice to keep events attended relatvely informal. But as long as that is the policy - keeping jewellery subtle fits in and that's what Kate has done.

      I love the Strathmore rose tiara but after the difficulties with the Nizam, I'm not sure that would be the best look on Kate - I think she made wise tiara choices on the two occasions so far, and that the Sapphire Feodorovna tiara would be a natural extension with a little worn tiara that presumably is still in the royal vaults.

      There still remains the possiblity that a new tiara might appear. Kate has green eyes and emeralds may be as much her stones as sapphires. She wore those emerald earrings that looked like they could be part of a larger set not yet seen - I didn't love the earring per se but I did like the colour of the stones on Kate. As I know, the only tiara with emeralds is the Vladimir which the queen still wears and it has changeable stones. I don't recall another emerald one - leaving a void.

      A crime was the sale or dismantling of the amethyst tiara the queen had - it looks to me like Camilla may have worn earrings that were once part of it - I cringe every time I see them, and the necklace was apparently sold. Didn't it ever occur to the queen she might have a female relative who would look lovely in lavender? I'm not sure how Kate's dark hair would have looked with the tiara but she does look lovely in violet hues. It's a shame in any event.

      Delete
    11. ANON @ 21:16

      "deploying" tiaras, cute. And a certain
      kind of reality to that also.

      Delete
    12. Julia, what was the Danish tiara fiasco?

      Delete
    13. Why does Kate's work always come into a conversation? Why can't people let it rest. She will not be working alot intil they both are full time royals. Right now the Queen and Charles are letting them be a family which I love. So let it rest.

      Delete
    14. Maryland Moxie28 June 2015 at 10:56

      It's not like you see the Queen and Camilla wearing tiaras to the local farm park and polo matches. You bust out the jewelry when you are officially entertaining foreign dignitaries to dazzle them and impress them with your wealth. In so far as the Queen has appointed Edward and Sophie her social ambassadors (weddings) - I wonder if Charles will switch it up when he becomes King and send William or Harry on his behalf.

      Delete
    15. "Why does Kate's work always come into a conversation? "

      .... because it is essential to her lifestyle of give to/take from the subjects.

      Delete
    16. I think Camilla wears jewels well, and the POW pin she wore at her wedding was one Charles designed in the 1990s.

      Moxie, I prefer to wear my tiaras while cleaning the house. The pointy ones make handy hooks for cleaning supplies too.

      Delete
    17. Yes Moxie, like someone mentioned earlier, they "deploy" the bling.
      Don't know what Charles has in mind for that but it will be one of many things to consider. I just pray that his transition to the throne goes smoothly when the time comes.

      Delete
    18. Danish tiara fiasco? What Danish tiara fiasco?

      Delete
    19. Julia, to me the selling of Princess Margaret's tiara/Jewelry was so sad.
      I think that all should have been put in Queen Eliabeth's private collection for posterity. I also think that that Simpson woman's jewelry should have been likewise since monies from the Royal family purchased those pieces. I hope Fergie truly still has her wedding and tiara since those are historical.

      Delete
    20. "fiddly Nizam". cute, Julia. I think that necklace would look good on Kate with another gown and her hair up, not just half way up either. Going to google the other necklace you mentioned.
      Kate doesn't need a stylist, she just needs to read this blog. :)

      Delete
    21. Julia, did the amethyst tiara have a name?

      Delete
    22. Julia @ 01:45

      I so agree that William and Kate, not down playing Royal status would do more for good pr than the way the seem to be approaching it currently.
      Their current approach, which allows them a more "normal" lifestyle, is confusing to many and aggravating to some. I am all for them having privacy and a more "normal" lifestyle but I do think they need to somehow incorporate more of the Royal aspect into their lives. I want to see Kate more "princessy" and I am an adult. :)
      I too think there are many little girls out there who would love to see Kate more "princessy" also if Disney movies are any indication.

      Delete
    23. Julia/Leo-I agree with most of what you wrote. Apparently, you weren't referring to Kate not working-just her not attending formal events where big jewellery is common .Attendance at those events is strictly at the invitation of HM. We don't know whether or not the Cambridges themselves choose not to attend .As has been said before, it is difficult to imagine William refusing an invitation from the Queen. Or they may
      be mindful of their place in the royal scheme of things. They represent the future. Their time will come.

      Also, I was clearly referencing her personal jewellery taste, which, except for that Zara necklace( which
      still puzzles and intrigues me) is quite minimalist in design. I didn't understand what performance of her
      royal work, such as attending Trooping, garden parties, had to do with her personal choice in jewellery.

      I think we still don't have an agreed upon definition of royal work and full time royal on this blog. Or any official word on who decides what "work" is done when by whom. I believe charities are not considered in this.
      A post on what the official word is about some of our oft- disputed and quibbled terms mght be helpful.

      At any rate, Leo, I thoroughly enjoyed your posts, as I have in times past. Your point that the
      younger generation might possibly enjoy the regalness of royalty is valid, I think. I do wonder if William might
      be more concerned with political opinion, rather than generational views, of the royal show. I can't imagine
      republicans will be wooed with tiaras and expensive white-tie events.
      In fact, I enjoyed so much of your last two comments...
      I think Catherine would look wonderful in amethyst. Would she just not wear the sapphire ring for that
      occasion?

      Delete
    24. Julia, enjoying your posts so much.
      thanks for sharing

      Delete
    25. The amethyst Tiara and ensemble were sold. Could be due to the fact that in Victorian times the second phase of mourning allowed greys and lavenders. So that may have prompted the sale as social mores changed but the memory of that color didn't. The editor of vogue, Ann Wintar (sp)
      in recent times has been photographed in an amethyst necklace that seems to match exactly the one from the Tiara suite. The tiara was beautiful. Be so nice to know where it is today. If the necklace made it this far perhaps the tiara and the rest of the suite did also.

      Delete
    26. Julia, I loved emeralds on Kate but did not the style of the earrings at all.
      I loved the Vladimir tiara. How beautiful is that. Oh, wait. Camilla has already worn that. The Alexandra koloshinka (sp) tiara is very beautiful and one I think suits Kate aesthetics
      nicely. very formal, very important. Has Camilla worn that?

      Delete
    27. Julia from Leominster29 June 2015 at 02:01

      First of all, the Danish "fiasco" maybe too strong a word. When her younger son Joachim married, Queen Margrethe gave his delightful new wife the Alexandrine Tiara as a gift. The trouble is the marriage didn't last. The Danish royal family handled things a bit better than the British (lessons learnt perhaps) and made Alexandra a royal duchess, but the tiara left the immediate family with her.

      I don't know that it is a huge difficultly as the tiara seems likely to go to Alexandra's two sons and might reenter the immediate family that way - but there is a risk she could sell it or it might end up being "sold back" into the family. It's generally thought that Margrethe thought better of tiara giving - when the crown prince married, Mary didn't get a tiara (at that point Joachim's marriage was starting to break up) and neither did his second wife Marie. They either had loans or modern tiaras. I suspect this was on the Swedish family's mind when Sofia got a new tiara with no family history and may also be why Kate isn't getting a family tiara as a gift to our knowledge quite yet.

      As for the Lover's Knot, it was a gift as well, but Diana may have given it back or been required to give it back (the idea being it was a gift to the "Princess of Wales" which she was no longer or, that it came back to the family after her death. Personally, I see no problem with Kate wearing it - since she is the Duchess of Cambridge, it seems meant to be. She looks nothing like Diana and much like the ring, she could make it her own. There is a good discussion of the Danish situation on OSS http://orderofsplendor.blogspot.com/2012/11/tiara-thursday-alexandrine-drop-tiara.html and a good discussion of Diana's on the Court Jeweller http://www.thecourtjeweller.com/2014/05/queen-marys-lovers-knot-tiara.html

      Delete
    28. Maggie - Minneapolis29 June 2015 at 02:20

      Anon 99 - if William is more concerned about the republicans than the public, then I think he's making a serious mistake. There is no way to assuage the concerns of republicans without getting rid of the royal family. He isn't going to make them happy living the way he is now - yes, they probably won't be impressed with tiaras and ball-gowns, but they're certainly not impressed with him accepting all royal privileges without doing much royal duty wise. This is not meant to mean I don't think William works - I'm just saying this is what the republicans think.
      The republican's success or failure, imo, is contingent on public support. William will never change the minds of republicans, but he CAN change the minds of the many people they need on their side. And that requires differentiating the royal family from others. That doesn't mean he should act like royal people are more important than non-royals, but just that they are different. And I think a lot of people associate that difference with things like tiaras and ball-gowns. The royal family needs to SEEM special. If people really start thinking of William as just another air ambulance pilot, then I don't think they'll be as okay with funding his home renovations and security.

      I also think William and Kate do less state events because they are afraid that doing state banquets and wearing a tiara will make them appear like they are completely jumping into royal life. If people see Kate in a tiara with William in a suit next to her, then they will really start thinking of the Cambridges as Prince and Princess. And that would make it harder for William and Kate to hole away at Anmer and limit duties for the next few years imo. That and the possibility of people being angry that they aren't doing as many duties as the older members but then are showing up in expensive crowns and clothes. Or, perhaps, they just find the kind of events that require crowns and ball-gowns to be out-dated and not enjoyable - but if that's the case, the monarchy is not going to last long after the Queen.

      Delete
    29. Prince Joachim and Princess Alexandra of Denmark divorced, and a beautiful tiara remained with her. I believe the tiara was a gift to Queen Margrethe when she was eighteen. She gave it as a wedding present to Princess Alexandra, who wore it beautifully while she was a member of the Danish royal family. Sadly, it is now out of circulation, though Alexandra is invited to some family events and may have worn it once or twice since her remarriage. Also, she and Joachim have two sons. Probably the wife of one of them will someday wear this tiara. I do hope so, as it is one of the loveliest tiaras anywhere.

      Delete
    30. Julia from Leominster29 June 2015 at 07:19

      Anon 21:47, I agree a different gown and hairstyle would improve the Nizam but I still don't find it the best choice for Kate. If I had my way, she would be attending state banquets all over the place and I have my eye on several necklaces in the royal collection that the queen doesn't wear much or don't really suit her and which wouldn't suit Camilla which would look wonderful on Kate. Besides the Dubai loop- my favourite for Kate since the stones are really too big for the queen, there are a couple of tassel necklaces - one in sapphires, and one in emeralds that have a modern youthful feel. Diana looked brilliant in the Faisal diamond necklace and Sophie has worn it successfully too - that would be another great choice for Kate.

      Oh well, I can dream and hope I live long enough to see her wear something....

      Delete
  31. I love too see the duchess of Cambridge lovers knot they are several tiara she can wore halo or the one she papyrus tiara every royal bride wears tiara I love seeing one tiara every royal wedding perhaps a state visit one week before princess charlotte christening

    ReplyDelete
  32. Oh my gosh the Strathmore rose tiara is gorgeous! It would be awesome to see Kate in a tiara like Princess Mary has done in portraits.. My heart fluttered to think that one day Princess Charlotte, and Georgie's wife will be wearing these too... Oh to be a princess!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Strathmore Rose Tiara is one of my top picks, too. I also think the Spencer tiara is more regal than most
      of the heirloom ones from the royal family.
      I don't think the Rose tiara would suit Camilla-it is very youthful and probably not considered showy enough.
      However, it comes from the QM's family. I doubt Catherine will wear it. Maybe Charles's grandaughter will
      wear it?

      Delete
    2. Julia from Leominster29 June 2015 at 02:21

      99 - on royal work - I would first separate royals who aren't expected to take on an official duties (such as Beatrice and Eugenie) and then in a purely arbitrary way - I would define royal work this way.

      1. State Duties - Abroad. These include state visits and official appearances such as at royal weddings and funerals. Some visits abroad may not constitute official state visits organised by the foreign office. I'm thinking William and Kate's New York visit wasn't, even though William met with the president. Several of the engagements there were actually private.

      2. State Duties at home. This includes for me all the diplomatic receptions and state banquets as well as the many meetings the queen has with ambassadors and other dignataries. (Very easy to monitor on Her Majesty's Jewel Vault.) It also includes the opening of Parliament, investitures, the Garter and the Trooping, not to mention the queen's red boxes and meetings with the Prime Minister.

      3. Military duties such as being honourary Colonels. Male members of the royal family have traditionally served in some active capacity in the military as well. The Trooping could come under this but since it honours the queen's birthday, I'm calling it a state affair.

      4. All other official activities done by activee royals with relation to royal subjects at home. I'm not using charitable since they are of a much broader scope than that - they include being patrons of organisattions, making royal viists to charities, hospitals, schools and communities, the queen's lunches for people in public life, garden parties, being chancellors of universities. This covers a lot of ground but basically includes duties not direcly involved with diplomacy or the gorvernment.

      5. Traditional activities that are private but still assciociated with the royal family such as Ascot or the Braemar games, or Wimbledon. Lines can get a little blurry here as the queen is chiefton of the Games, and the Duke of Kent attends Wimbledon as its president (the queen is the patron) while Kate usually attends in a private capacity. But such attendance - such as Kate as the Olympics, seems a bit different from day to day work.
      This is just my way of dividing things for convenience - it has no official relevance. A part-time working royal in my mind is one who takes on some duties (a bit more than just showing up at the Trooping) but who doesn't put the majority of their time towards any of the catagories list above.

      Delete
  33. *Mirabelle Contest Winner*

    I have updated our last post with news on the winner of the Mirabele Lolita Earrings. Congratulations to Mrs D in Dublin. If reading could you please email me at hrhcatherineblog@hotmail.com

    I'll also share the news in the next post, thank you to everyone who entered :)

    ReplyDelete
  34. In other news!

    William and Kate had tea with Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie at KP on Friday to disucss "their shared interest in combatting the illegal wildlife trade".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rebecca - Sweden27 June 2015 at 19:52

      I read that. How cool! I hope more stuff comes of this! :D

      Delete
    2. Not to be off topic but remember that little girl on the balcony at William and Kate's wedding? the one who covered her ears during the flyby? They said her father was a former Calvin klein model. I found out that not only was he a model, but more to the point, he is an Astor from the Astor family. I didn't see that mentioned in all the wedding coverage. So, the little girl in their wedding had quite a pedigree of her own as far as those things go. You guys probably already knew that?

      Delete
    3. Interesting. That must revolve around William's work with conservation. Didn't realize that the Jolie-Pitts were involved there.

      Delete
    4. Julia from Leominster28 June 2015 at 03:32

      I think there could be a muddle there - that little girl I thought was a van Cutsem and it's her mum who is an Astor.

      I think the Calvin Klein model is married to Camilla's daughter - their daughter was also a bridesmaid - the little blonde girl Charles picked up with prodding from Camilla - or was that the child of Camilla's son?

      Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

      Delete
    5. Yes, Julia, Charles picked up Camilla's granddaughter.

      Delete
    6. The little girl Charles was holding is Camilla's granddaughter. The little girl who covered her ears is the daughter of the Calvin Klein model who is very much indeed an Astor.

      Delete
    7. oops, to clarify,
      Laura Lopes, Camilla's daughter,
      married Harry Lopes, the Calvin Klein model who also happens to be the grandson of the 2nd. Baron of Astor, Gavin Astor. Their daughter is the little girl Charles was holding. But wait, it gets better. :)
      Grace Van Custem, the little girl who covered her ears on the balcony, is a daughter of Hugh (Jr.) Van Custem who married Rose Nancy Langhorne Astor (yep, Astor). So both little girls are Astors. small world isn't it.

      Delete
    8. From ANON @ 23:11 and 21:17
      corrections duly noted @ 21:33
      so people don't get really confused.
      sorry about that. :) Interesting though,
      yeh?

      Delete
    9. The Jolie-Pitts are greatly involved in conservation.

      Jolie purchased land in Cambodia which had been poached on and turned it into a nature preserve. She is patron of several wildlife foundations and sanctuaries in Africa.
      I'm pretty sure she has funded several large-animal conservation projects in Namibia.

      She doesn't just talk about how wildlife conservation is needed, she’s actually active in her pursuits.

      Don't know if this story is true. However, I hope Will and Kate can learn by their example and left the meeting feeling inspired and energized and not merely starstruck.

      Delete
    10. Julia from Leominster29 June 2015 at 07:22

      Very interesting and major confusing - especially with all those Astor connections!

      Delete
  35. ANON @ 02:22

    I agree that the Marie Feodorovna Sapphire
    Bandeau Tiara looks like it was designed just for Kate. I googled that tiara and there were so many other tiaras on there that I have never seen before even when I researched tiaras previously. Queen Elizabeth had on a diamond and sapphire tiara that is very sizeable. Many other "new" tiaras on the page also.
    I would still love to have William gift Kate with a tiara of her own design also. I don't think that that is that far fetched actually.
    That would probably be quite a work of art.
    She designed her wedding cake and that was singularly beautiful and I believe she actually had a lot to do with the design of her wedding earrings. She included the design in the border of the cake display room on her cake and her earrings echoed
    the leaves on the tiara. I think any tiara she would design would have an acorn or oak leaf in there somewhere.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Julia from Leominster29 June 2015 at 02:31

      Some of the current royal tiaras have wonderful jewels but are more sixties horrors than things of beauty (I'm thinking of the ruby and the aquamarine especially. So there would be some good reason for Kate to put her design skills to work with them. Unlike some of the older tiaras, I don't think many people would have a problem with that. Tiara fiddling is old and honourable.

      The amethyst tiara is/ was known as Queen Mary's amethyst tiara and I very much hope it was just sold - leaving the possibility of a future appearance. The necklace was indeed worn by Anna Wynter. (Didn't do much with the dress she chose to wear with it.) But Camilla has worn some earrings that aren't the earrings that went with the parure but look like they might have come from the tiara. I hope I'm wrong - I dislike Camilla enough already - although the damage was probably done by someone else - the queen mum or the queen. The queen does have another similar amethyst necklace which increases the confusion. But the tiara was lovely - maybe Charlotte can post a photo on the Royal Digest sometime.

      Delete
  36. I hope they do an official portrait of Kate
    soon, a painted one. Hadn't Diana had one done by this time in her marriage? I don't mean the one done with Kate in the dark green dress (you know, the spooky one).
    A painted portrait of the four of them would be nice also.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The "spooky one" is an official portrait and it was painted. It hangs in the National Portrait Gallery so I think that's pretty officiall.

      Delete
    2. Julia from Leominster28 June 2015 at 03:39

      Diana had a lot more painting but most were commissoned by charities she was heavily involved with. Before her wedding, there was just the one informal portrait, not disimilar in formality to the one of Kate. Charles also had a painting of Diana in her wedidng dress done privately - no way to know now if William did the same.

      Charlotte has an excellent review of the Diana portraits over on the Royal Digest - still easy to call up. I love it except Charlotte missed my favourite - the one of Diana in a red lace gown. Think I made a comment on the notes (I was completely anonymous back then.) The artist was June Mendoza. It's a great piece on portraits though and worth looking at to get ideas about how Kate might be depicted in the future.

      Delete
    3. Thanks Julia. :)
      Enjoyed your posts as usual. I think it would be lovely for Kate to work with Sarah Burton on a gown for a formal portrait (with a tiara of course) for publication. Sarah could even help her design a new tiara or she could premier her appearance of the Cambridge Lover's Knot tiara while she is still the Duchess of Cambridge. That tiara does have a lot of Cambridge history
      so I think her wearing it like that would be very fitting. The gown could be designed to enhance the Tiara to the max. Gee, I hope that happens. :)
      Kate, are you reading this blog? Rebecca? palace pr team? Queen Elizabeth? William? Harry? lol

      Delete
    4. Yes Bluhare I know where that portrait is and that it is an "official" portrait.
      Thanks for the particulars. I, for one,
      dislike that painting immensely and find it wrong in every way. In fact, I find the darn thing very spooky. Aside from that, I am so longing for an official oil portrait of Kate in a beautiful, regal gown and tiara. As has been mentioned, a premier appearance of the Cambridge Lover's Knot tiara with
      that gown would be phenomenal. Kate is the Duchess of Cambridge,
      very much in love with the Duke of Cambridge so how approps. That way she can be the first to wear it since Diana. I think William would love that. I hope that happens while she is still the Duchess of Cambridge, before she becomes the Princess of Wales.

      Delete
    5. Oh, sorry, Anonymous. I didn't think you knew Kate sat for the spooky one, as you expressed a desire for an official portrait. Silly me!

      Delete
    6. I also beleive that Charles commossioned a portrait of Catherine for William's 30th birthday. It must hang in his office. Not sure though.

      Delete
    7. no problem Bluhare. Let's hope that first portrait hasn't made her swear off of portraits for life. :)
      You, silly???? preposterous

      Delete
    8. Julia from Leominster29 June 2015 at 02:35

      I'm not a lover of that portrait - although it looks much better when I finally got around to seeing it in person. I think it's a bit early for a formal portrait of Kate but it would be beyond charming to have one done with her and her children - historic as well. I remmeber (being a dinosaur) that along with her official White House portrait, Jackie Kennedy had the artiist do one (can't recall if a sketch or full size) of her reading to her children. If the queen can have the corgies, why not Kate and the little ones - and Lupo too. The public heart would melt.

      Delete
    9. Bluhare, that portrait was so dismal that although it is labeled "official" and I knew that, I had just totally discounted it in my mind because I think it is such a bad joke and I am awaiting a suitable "official" portrait (with a gown and tiara of course.) Thanks for playing editor though. :)

      Delete
  37. a painted portrait in a gown and tiara.
    a must, don't cha think?

    ReplyDelete
  38. I wonder why Kate didn't wear a tiara to the Malaysian state reception in 2012. I would have loved to see one on her.

    ReplyDelete
  39. I love that Catherine wore the halo tiara & it had been my pick prior to the wedding. That her earrings matched the tiara made it perfect. I really dislike Sophie's tiara & I don't believe that she wears it often. Also the black & white pearl jewelry that Edward designed was not my favorite. My favorite tiaras seem to be the floral tiaras. I also like some color.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I also am not enthralled with Sophie's black and white pearls. But I do like her wedding tiara, which was made from parts of Queen Victoria's circlet. The empty golden frame still exists, and it is beautiful in itself, but diamonds from the alternate motifs were used for the Queen Mother's crown. Therefore, Sophie's wedding tiara, which used but did not alter the remaining circlet parts, is a historic piece. I thought the lacy look was pretty with Sophie's veil, but it does not have many other admirers.

      Delete
    2. Julia from Leominster29 June 2015 at 02:38

      Can't say I cared much for either. I like the aquamarine one she wears sometimes now (a loan I think) a bit better. It would be fun if Charlotte did a Royal Digest on LEAST loved royal jewels. There are some out there - along with the magnificent ones - although of course all opinions are subjective.

      Delete
  40. Just saw an article that kate and william had tea with brad pitt and angelina jolie, fact or fiction?

    ReplyDelete
  41. Congratulations to Mrs. D from Dublin! I know your daughter's christening will be a lovely and special day, and you will look lovely in your outfit and the earrings! And the next day you'll be able to relax and enjoy the pictures of Princess Charlotte's christening. She and your daughter will grow up in tandem, just as my son and Princes William and Harry have, and as my grandson and Prince George and Princess Charlotte also will. Enjoy!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Congratulations from me too!

      Delete
  42. Maggie and Stephanie,

    Could you both please email me at hrhcatherineblog@hotmail.com

    I have a request from a reader for you :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maggie - Minneapolis29 June 2015 at 01:50

      Emailed! Thanks Charlotte :)

      Delete
  43. Thank you for this post. I love seeing all the tiaras and reading the history about them. I quite like both tiaras Kate has worn since becoming the Duchess of Cambridge. I look forward to seeing her in a tiara again, but am happy to know that she is living as close to a normal life as a mother and wife as she can. Thanks for the posts, Charlotte! I look forward to them.

    ReplyDelete

Comments are most welcome! Constructive discussion is always encouraged but off topic or hateful remarks will not be published. If you wish to share your name and where you're from without using the sign in options, simply select the "Name/URL" option on the drop down menu and insert your name, and if you wish the country/state you're from. You can leave the URL blank.

If there are a large number of comments, it is necessary to click the 'Load More' button at the end of the comments section to see the latest additions.