Duchess of Cornwall Jewellery 3: Nov 2005 - Feb 2007

[scooter]

Camilla loaned her first wedding tiara, the Cubbit now Shand tiara to her daughter Laura for her wedding. This looks like a converted necklace, does anyone else know if it was a necklace at one time?

http://s2.supload.com/image.php?get=4-20060506170253.jpg

Many pieces from that era were convertable from necklace to tiara to bracelets to brooches. 'Queen's Jewels' is an excellent and beautifully photographed book on the subject.

 

[Madame Royale]

I disagree with you re the emerald choker. Whilst Diana brought it to some attention by wearing it as a headband for us royal jewel watchers it will be forever associated with the magnificance of Queen Mary. Perhaps 'Milla will oblige us in the future and wear the entire Cambridge Emerald Parure:-

I wasn't disputing Queen Mary's claim and memory regarding the piece . It shall always be attributed to the late Queen Dowager.

But, I do think the piece to have been greatly associated with Diana (it was afterall one of the wedding presents from HM the Queen) and as you said yourself, she did bring attention to it that I dont think will soon be forgotten.

For me it would be bad taste (no matter how stunning the piece is) for Camilla to wear her husbands ex-wife's wedding present, whether loaned or not.

But I agree that such an array would look magnificant

 

[MARG]

For me it would be bad taste (no matter how stunning the piece is) for Camilla to wear her husbands ex-wife's wedding present, whether loaned or not.

But I agree that such an array would look magnificant

OK. But, was it a wedding present or merely her right to wear her husband's coat of arms. I think we have to separate the two. A wedding present is personal and has no ties. The Prince of Wales monograph is merely part of the job discription. Princess of Wales. Diana has been dead for over 9 years, and even then she was the divorced wife of the Prince of Wales.
Camilla is the wife of the Prince of Wales in 2006. The 21st century is where we have to live. Our heritage is a living thing, not static and the people we invest in this are also living things and not headstones.

 

[branchg]

The only truly royal jewels Diana possessed were The Lover's Knot Tiara and the Art Deco Cambridge Emerald Choker, both of which belonged to Queen Mary and were bequests to The Queen. Diana received them as wedding gifts for a future Queen and was permitted to keep them after the divorce.

These items were returned to The Queen after Diana's death and the rest of her jewels were her personal property which belong to William and Harry.

 

[Madame Royale]

OK. But, was it a wedding present or merely her right to wear her husband's coat of arms...

I appreciate your response but am not sure how it relates to mine as I was not referring to the Prince Wales Coat of Arms, but Queen Mary's Emerald & Diamond Art Deco Choker which was personally selected by HM the Queen as a wedding gift for the then, soon to be, Princess of Wales.

For sake of preventing further confusion please refer to, if you haven't already, post #159

Sorry Avalon. I was responding when you had made your comment so perhaps you can place our posts in a more appropriate thread? Thanks

 

[Madame Royale]

The only truly royal jewels Diana possessed were The Lover's Knot Tiara and the Art Deco Cambridge Emerald Choker, both of which belonged to Queen Mary and were bequests to The Queen. Diana received them as wedding gifts for a future Queen and was permitted to keep them after the divorce.

These items were returned to The Queen after Diana's death and the rest of her jewels were her personal property which belong to William and Harry.

Not forgetting the large sapphire brooch surrounded by two rows of brilliant cut diamonds that was given to Diana by HM Queen Elizabeth as an engagement present.

I think it looked great as part of the pearl choker Seven rows if I recall correctly.

 

[wymanda]

Not forgetting the large sapphire brooch surrounded by two rows of brilliant cut diamonds that was given to Diana by HM Queen Elizabeth as an engagement present.

I think it looked great as part of the pearl choker Seven rows if I recall correctly.

That was not a Royal Jewel. It came from the Queen Mother but I don't recall any royal provenance prior to that.

 

[Madame Royale]

That was not a Royal Jewel. It came from the Queen Mother but I don't recall any royal provenance prior to that.

Well, I look at it this way...if it was inherited, purchased or given to a royal by a royal then it does have a royal provenance but if you disagree that's ok. It may not have a historical origin as such but of royal provenance it is.

I know the brooch (subsequently a chocker) to be part of the late Princess' personal collection so I assume it has now been left to either of her two sons (probably William but of course I dont know).

Perhaps branchg knows more of the jewel?

 

[Prince of Chota]

I am positive that these are two separate brooch / pendants. I actually have somewhere a picture of the original parure, showing both side-by-side. I'm a bit short on time this week, but I'll see if I can find it and upload it.

 

[Roslyn]

The only truly royal jewels Diana possessed were The Lover's Knot Tiara and the Art Deco Cambridge Emerald Choker, both of which belonged to Queen Mary and were bequests to The Queen. Diana received them as wedding gifts for a future Queen and was permitted to keep them after the divorce.

These items were returned to The Queen after Diana's death and the rest of her jewels were her personal property which belong to William and Harry.

I'm a little confused. The choker was made from Cambridge emeralds, which Queen Mary inherited from her brother who had inherited them from their mother. Queen Mary's jewels were her personal property, and she bequeathed them in her will. She left the choker to the Queen, but she never wore it and gave it to Diana as a wedding gift. If it was the Queen's personal property, wouldn't it become Diana's personal property? Why would it have been returned to the Queen after Diana's death? Was it a provision of the divorce settlement?

 

[Roslyn]

That was not a Royal Jewel. It came from the Queen Mother but I don't recall any royal provenance prior to that.

"The Queen's Jewels" just says it was a wedding gift from the Queen Mother - "a massive Sri-Lankan oval sapphire set as a brooch in a double row of diamonds". Sounds like it was acquired by the Queen Mother to give to Diana. The year after the wedding Diana had it adapted so it could be worn as the centrepiece of a seven-row pearl choker. She was photographed wearing it for the first time at her brother's 21st birthday dance.

 

[branchg]

Not forgetting the large sapphire brooch surrounded by two rows of brilliant cut diamonds that was given to Diana by HM Queen Elizabeth as an engagement present.

I think it looked great as part of the pearl choker Seven rows if I recall correctly.

No one knows exactly how The Queen Mother came into possession of the Sri Lankan sapphire, but it may have been part of the collection of unset stones she had accumulated over the years, likely to be gifts from the Indian princes or passed on to her by Queen Mary.

Either way it was a wedding gift made for Diana with two rows of diamonds (again possibly from The Queen Mother's collection) and was considered to be a personal item since it was not part of the Sovereign's collection.

 

[Elspeth]

I'm a little confused. The choker was made from Cambridge emeralds, which Queen Mary inherited from her brother who had inherited them from their mother. Queen Mary's jewels were her personal property, and she bequeathed them in her will. She left the choker to the Queen, but she never wore it and gave it to Diana as a wedding gift. If it was the Queen's personal property, wouldn't it become Diana's personal property? Why would it have been returned to the Queen after Diana's death? Was it a provision of the divorce settlement?

It may depend on how Queen Mary left the jewels. The Queen Mother left her property to the Queen in a sovereign-to-sovereign tax-exempt transfer. If something like that was done when Queen Mary left her jewels to the present Queen, that would take them out of the purely personal category.

The other thing is that since that emerald choker was part of a parure, I very much doubt that it was an outright personal gift. The Queen seems to be too much of a traditionalist to go breaking up one of the most valuable sets of jewellery in the royal collection.

 

[branchg]

I'm a little confused. The choker was made from Cambridge emeralds, which Queen Mary inherited from her brother who had inherited them from their mother. Queen Mary's jewels were her personal property, and she bequeathed them in her will. She left the choker to the Queen, but she never wore it and gave it to Diana as a wedding gift. If it was the Queen's personal property, wouldn't it become Diana's personal property? Why would it have been returned to the Queen after Diana's death? Was it a provision of the divorce settlement?

Diana's divorce settlement stipulated she was entitled to keep all gifts of royal jewels for her lifetime and could never lend or sell them without the permission of The Sovereign. The agreement also stated all jewels given to her by The Queen, The Queen Mother and Prince Charles were to be given to William after her death.

So, it's likely William's future wife will wear the familiar jewels someday again.

 

[branchg]

Queen Mary was very specific in her will of which jewels were left to The Queen in right of the Crown and which were left to her as personal bequests. It's never been made public, so we don't really know.

Either way, all of Diana's jewels worn by Queen Mary were returned to The Queen after her death and are likely to reappear on William's future wife.

 

[Boris]

Diana's divorce settlement stipulated she was entitled to keep all gifts of royal jewels for her lifetime and could never lend or sell them without the permission of The Sovereign. The agreement also stated all jewels given to her by The Queen, The Queen Mother and Prince Charles were to be given to William after her death.

Dear branchg, I would like to know what your source is regarding Princess Diana's divorce settlement?
This is not to disregard your post, I'm just curious - I thought that the exact details of the settlement were never made public, let alone the terms regarding jewelry.
Anyway, it's a bit questionable to re-write history here - the British RF announced way back then that several pieces including Queen Mary's emerald choker, the Queen Mother's Sri Lanka sapphire, the Prince of Wales' Feathers pendant etc. etc. (None of them Crown property!) were indeed personal wedding or engagement gifts to Princess Diana, and not a loan.
Princess Diana certainly kept her jewelry after the divorce and in spite of loosing her title - the proof being that she wore the Queen Mary emerald choker as late as for her last birthday, about a month before her death.
A closer look at both the divorce settlement and the Princess of Wales' last will would be most interesting in this regard though it's very probable that we might never find out.

 

[Elspeth]

Diana's divorce settlement stipulated she was entitled to keep all gifts of royal jewels for her lifetime and could never lend or sell them without the permission of The Sovereign. The agreement also stated all jewels given to her by The Queen, The Queen Mother and Prince Charles were to be given to William after her death.

So, it's likely William's future wife will wear the familiar jewels someday again.

It certainly is. However, I assume more safeguards were put on both the choker and the lovers' knot tiara than just something in her divorce settlement. If the divorce settlement was the only thing stopping her selling those historic pieces, they'd have been quite a bargaining chip while she was separated or even still married but not getting along with Charles and the family.

It would seem quite reckless for the Queen to just give part of a historic parure as a no-strings personal bequest to someone, and the Queen isn't reckless.

 

[branchg]

Ingrid Seward interviewed Diana a month before she died and later wrote in her book that The Princess had told her she could not sell or lend any of royal jewels or valuable antiques in Kensington Palace per the divorce agreement.

I doubt The Queen was too worried about Diana hocking Queen Mary's tiara or emerald choker. She supposedly was given many other pieces over the years by The Queen that rarely saw the light of day. Given her personal fortune and the millions she received in her settlement, money was never an issue for the Princess.

 

[branchg]

It certainly is. However, I assume more safeguards were put on both the choker and the lovers' knot tiara than just something in her divorce settlement. If the divorce settlement was the only thing stopping her selling those historic pieces, they'd have been quite a bargaining chip while she was separated or even still married but not getting along with Charles and the family.

It would seem quite reckless for the Queen to just give part of a historic parure as a no-strings personal bequest to someone, and the Queen isn't reckless.

The Queen has seen her cousins sell a number of Queen Mary's pieces over the years, including important Cambridge sapphires, to pay bills or death duties. It's not like Diana was loaded with Queen Mary's jewels in a safe somewhere.

Her most valuable jewels were her wedding gifts and other items she received from the Saudi King over the years. These gems were worth millions.

 

[ayvee]

I thought that the Queen Mary emerald choker that Diana received from QEII got returned to QEII. This choker is part of an on-going exhibit for dresses and jewels of QEII
http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/microsites/dressfortheoccasion/object.asp?exhibs=BPSO2006jewellery&item=5
I do wonder why in this decription, they simply say "It was worn by The Princess of Wales" rather than "It was given to The Princess of Wales". It really makes me think that Diana had its use but not ownership.

Maybe someone can correct me this notion.

Thanks, Ayvee

 

[MARG]

I appreciate your response but am not sure how it relates to mine as I was not referring to the Prince Wales Coat of Arms, but Queen Mary's Emerald & Diamond Art Deco Choker which was personally selected by HM the Queen as a wedding gift for the then, soon to be, Princess of Wales.

Apologies Madame Royale, I was, of course referring to the infamous brooch. About which my comments stand.

 

[Madame Royale]

No one knows exactly how The Queen Mother came into possession of the Sri Lankan sapphire, but it may have been part of the collection of unset stones she had accumulated over the years, likely to be gifts from the Indian princes or passed on to her by Queen Mary.

Either way it was a wedding gift made for Diana with two rows of diamonds (again possibly from The Queen Mother's collection) and was considered to be a personal item since it was not part of the Sovereign's collection.

Thanks for your response, branchg.

The possibilities of its provenance are really intruiging. What a history if this is the case

Knowing it had not belonged to HM the Queen, I just wanted to add it to the list which you had already noted regarding her 'truly royal jewels', which I also associated to be amongst her most recognisable.

Again, thank you for your response

Apologies Madame Royale, I was, of course referring to the infamous brooch. About which my comments stand.

That's quite alright, Marg

 

[msleiman]

I think all this talk about the brooch is just crazy. I think that it is not a question of if Camilla can wear any of the royal collection, it is why would she pick these peices. It is also not a question of if you are a Diana or Camilla fan? It is a question of why would you pick something that your husbands ex wore? Camilla IS the current POW, like it or not! Camilla is set to become the next Queen, like it or not! I think for me, I would just pick other items. I would think that fans of Camilla would not want to see her in items that Diana did wear and wore alot. So I think that all this talk about can she wear it or not is just silly, yes she can! But why would you.

 

[Skydragon]

It is a question of why would you pick something that your husbands ex wore? Camilla IS the current POW, like it or not! Camilla is set to become the next Queen, like it or not! I think for me, I would just pick other items. I would think that fans of Camilla would not want to see her in items that Diana did wear and wore alot. So I think that all this talk about can she wear it or not is just silly, yes she can! But why would you.

As you can see from some of the other posts, not all of us believe it was the same brooch, just another brooch in the same style. Did you all expect Charles to stop using it on his letterheads just because his ex died?

Why would Camilla choose to wear the Prince of Wales Feathers brooch, because her husband had it made for her, IMO, and it is his heraldic symbol as a Prince of Wales, not an exclusive design for his ex wife.

 

[msleiman]

Again, I just do not understand this! Camilla is the wife of the Prince of Wales. She has nothing more to prove. All I am saying is if it is the same brooch, why would she want to even wear it. It has nothing to do with can she, it has to do with why she would want to!!!!!! If Prince Charles had a copy made of the the lover's knot why would Camilla want to wear it. I really do not care if she wears a POW Feathers Brooch, but why make it look like the one Diana wore. Make another kind of POW Brooch. I really do not believe that people would want to wear something to looked like something the ex wife wore.

 

[Zonk]

I kind of agree with portion of Msleiman's statement.

Certainly Camilla is entitled to wear any jewels that the Princess of Wales should wear. She is after all Princess of Wales. I personally wouldn't wear anything associated with an ex wife...dead or not. But thats just me and everyone is certainly entitled to think differently! As someone else mentioned, there's enough jewels in the royal vault that haven't seen the light of day for some time! Now it would be great if those pieces were pulled out and identified with Camilla. Wouldn't that be something to talk about

Though I would also agree that based on the pictures these are two totally different brooches and if Charles had both of them made at different times and with different feelings (his) than that is just as acceptable. Unfortunately for us, the press will not let the Camila vs Diana comparison just go away....and I say that as Diana fan (but not a fanatic . At some point, we need to just move on, let her rest in peace and enjoy the days that we now live in.

 

[branchg]

The brooches were all made for Queen Alexandra when she was Princess of Wales (there were several using the feathers) and another made for Queen Mary. So, there are at least four versions of the brooch featuring the heraldic symbol.

It's not a big deal one way or another. It's not like Camilla is waltzing around wearing Diana's jewels.

 

[Skydragon]

Again, I just do not understand this! Camilla is the wife of the Prince of Wales. She has nothing more to prove. All I am saying is if it is the same brooch, why would she want to even wear it. It has nothing to do with can she, it has to do with why she would want to!!!!!!

The brooch design was about long before Diana and will probably be about in an identical design long after Williams reign ends! It is not a case of having anything to prove, it is a design that her husband likes.

Perhaps we should do away with the princess cut for gemstones, or how about chokers, it is just plain silly. Camilla was wearing a brooch given to her by her darling husband and why shouldn't he give her a brooch of his heraldic symbol, to show his love!

 

[Jo of Palatine]

The brooch design was about long before Diana and will probably be about in an identical design long after Williams reign ends! It is not a case of having anything to prove, it is a design that her husband likes.

IIRC Diana had use of the Spencer Tiara till her brother's new wife wanted to wear it and so she had to return it to the Head of her family. It was reported that Diana didn't like to do it but she did it as tradition demanded it. So I believe that even if these jewels were once worn by Diana she would accept it as it's simply the tradition with family heirlooms to be passed to the next in line - be that lady the wife of the potential new Head of the House or the second wife of current Head. Diana grew up knowing these rules and accepted them, so she would have accepted it. So why should anyone else make a fuss about it?

I'm convinced in addition that if either prince William or prince Harry have a problem with Camilla wearing jewelery that once belonged to their mother, they will have any chance to voice that opposition and surely Camilla would not wear these pieces. So if the princes have no problem and Diana would have no problems either, again my question: why should anyone else bother?

 

[love_cc]

As long as Camilla don't wear Diana's jewllery, I think people should stop complaining about her choice. I don't think neither Charles or Camilla would regret the choice of the brooch. Camilla just wore her husband's symbol and matched with her earrings. The brooch is just beautiful and that's why Camilla wore it. Let's use this view to appreciate these historical jewllery. They have historical ties and they are beautiful.