Diana, Princess of Wales Jewellery 2: Ending 2022


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I always drooled over her chokers. Love the sapphire and diamond bracelet mounted on velvet..........stunning!!
That makes 2 of us- especially the big sapphire and pearl one!:D Just took a closer look at the braclet mounted on velvet- really how stunning is that?
I have loved that one for years, without knowing it was actully a braclet, since Diana wore it as a necklace! Stunning- and very Diana.
 
Last edited:
That's so awesome! Great detective work. Enjoy your new earrings!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
They are gorgeous!! Enjoy!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ayvee, I love that story. I have found myself really covetting certain pieces of jewelry. Even if I have to buy them in fakes its so fun to imagine your wearing something so special.
 
All of Diana's jewels, with the exception of the Lover's Knot Tiara and the Cambridge Emerald & Diamond Choker, were her personal property and now belong to William and Harry. There is no way Camilla would have access to these jewels.

The two royal pieces were from The Queen's personal collection and were returned to her after Diana's death. Whether they will reappear in the future remains to be seen.

Actually, Camilla has several times worn the prince of wales feather brooch which was a wedding gift to Diana. For several years it was under discussion whether it was the same piece until it was confirmed in one of the major jewelry 'bibles'. I am at the airport in Mexico at the moment, but I can look up the citation when I get home, if you like.
 
Actually, Camilla has several times worn the prince of wales feather brooch which was a wedding gift to Diana. For several years it was under discussion whether it was the same piece until it was confirmed in one of the major jewelry 'bibles'. I am at the airport in Mexico at the moment, but I can look up the citation when I get home, if you like.

There were at least two PofW brooches created and I believe Camilla wears the one made for Queen Alexandra. Diana wore Queen Mary's.

In any case, Diana returned the brooch after her divorce from Charles as it belonged to the Crown and she had no reason to wear it again.
 
There were at least two PofW brooches created and I believe Camilla wears the one made for Queen Alexandra. Diana wore Queen Mary's.

In any case, Diana returned the brooch after her divorce from Charles as it belonged to the Crown and she had no reason to wear it again.
It's sad and a tad annoying that this kind of incorrect information is being repeated again and again...
#1, private gifts as well as gifts during tours abroad were considered property of the recipient at the time when Diana was given them, in contrast to the current Windsor policy;
#2, Queen Alexandra's Prince of Wales diamond brooch with emerald drop was given to Lady Diana Spencer as an engagement gift by the Queen Mother and never belonged to the monarch, let alone The Crown;
#3, we don't know if the divorce settlement included this particular brooch or not - other important historic pieces like Queen Mary's emerald choker did remain with Diana as they were her property;
#4, the brooch worn by the Duchess of Cornwall is the same brooch as worn by Princess Diana.
 
Actually, Camilla has several times worn the prince of wales feather brooch which was a wedding gift to Diana. For several years it was under discussion whether it was the same piece until it was confirmed in one of the major jewelry 'bibles'. I am at the airport in Mexico at the moment, but I can look up the citation when I get home, if you like.

In my mind, the only true wearer of the Prince of Wales brooch in the BRF is the Princess of Wales - whoever the holder of that title may be.
 
In my mind, the only true wearer of the Prince of Wales brooch in the BRF is the Princess of Wales - whoever the holder of that title may be.

And as Camilla holds that title, I guess it would be her. :)
 
Some of the jewels that were on loan to Diana returned to The Queen after Diana's passing. The jewels that were Diana's own property is with her children now, I think.
 
Some of the jewels that were on loan to Diana returned to The Queen after Diana's passing. The jewels that were Diana's own property is with her children now, I think.

There is a misunderstanding that Princess Diana had jewellery on loan from the Queen - she didn't they were hers to keep. The Queen does not lend wedding presents.
 
There is a misunderstanding that Princess Diana had jewellery on loan from the Queen - she didn't they were hers to keep. The Queen does not lend wedding presents.

She actually does do lifetime loans, and that was the arrangement they had with the Cambridge Lover's knot
 
How do we know what was a lifetime loan, what was a gift, and what was a wedding gift?
 
I think it was a wedding gift but it was also a loan.

Like The Duchess of Cambridge was given the Cartier Scroll Tiara as a loan by The Queen on her wedding day. Catherine's parents had her weddings earrings designed based on the tiara, I think.

Diana was loaned a great deal of jewels by The Queen & Queen Mother. Like The Art Deco Emerald Choker: From Her Majesty's Jewel Vault: The Art Deco Emerald Choker was a lifetime loan to Diana and only returned to The Queen after Diana's passing. Diana was still due to wear the jewels and tiara even after her separation and divorce from Charles.

I do think it's a shame that some of these jewels Diana used to wear haven't seen the light of day yet. I guess it's up to Catherine and Harry's future wife to do something about that.
 
Last edited:
There is a misunderstanding that Princess Diana had jewellery on loan from the Queen - she didn't they were hers to keep. The Queen does not lend wedding presents.
Correct. Neither did Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother. The engagement and wedding gifts in jewelry were indeed gifts and Princess Diana's personal property.
Possible (maybe even provable) provisions made in the divorce settlement regarding to whom she was to leave her possessions in terms of historic jewelry in her will are speculation as we don't know the facts of this settlement.
Like The Art Deco Emerald Choker: From Her Majesty's Jewel Vault: The Art Deco Emerald Choker was a lifetime loan to Diana
No. It was a wedding gift from The Queen to Princess Diana.
She actually does do lifetime loans, and that was the arrangement they had with the Cambridge Lover's knot
No. It was a wedding gift from The Queen as well.
Diana was loaned a great deal of jewels by The Queen & Queen Mother.
Actually, she was loaned only remarkably few jewels for special occasions, and those were modern pieces like the Queen's diamond fringe necklaces from King Khalid and King Faisal of Saudi Arabia or the Queen's modern pearl choker with conical diamond centre.
How do we know what was a lifetime loan, what was a gift, and what was a wedding gift?
By reading the most reliable sources like the books of Menkes, Field, Munn etc.;)
 
Is it possible that as far as historic jewels are concerned, they were given back as back of the divorce settlement, rather than leaving it to her will (the natural assumption being that she would live till old age)?
 
Is it possible that as far as historic jewels are concerned, they were given back as back of the divorce settlement, rather than leaving it to her will (the natural assumption being that she would live till old age)?
Of course that's possible but difficult to determine as we don't know these details of the settlement for sure.
What we do know is that historic jewelry gifts like the emerald choker or The Queen Mother's sapphire were not 'given back' literally after the divorce, because Princess Diana continued to wear them.
I actually believe that The Queen wouldn't have been petty enough to try and turn the status of a gift into 'on loan' retroactively; I should think (and hope) it's more probable that agreements were made to whom those pieces like the emerald choker or the Lover's Knot Tiara should go to after Princess Diana's passing.
 
Is it possible that as far as historic jewels are concerned, they were given back as back of the divorce settlement, rather than leaving it to her will (the natural assumption being that she would live till old age)?

Well without reading the divorce settlement it difficult to say, what was publicised was that the jewellery would remain where it was...with Diana. It was the same with Sarah, Duchess of York - no jewels were returned!
 
Well without reading the divorce settlement it difficult to say, what was publicised was that the jewellery would remain where it was...with Diana. It was the same with Sarah, Duchess of York - no jewels were returned!

It was confirmed from several reliable sources at the time of the divorce that Diana was permitted to keep all of the jewels given to her by The Queen and The Queen Mother in her settlement agreement. However, she also agreed these jewels could never be lent or sold and would be given to Prince William after her death.

Since Diana died tragically a year later, the Lover's Knot Tiara and Cambridge Emerald Choker (along with some other pieces) were returned to The Queen as these were personal jewels she inherited from Queen Mary.

Sarah did not possess any jewels from the Royal Collection and her diamond parure was purchased from Garrard's by The Queen and Prince Philip as a wedding gift (along with her tiara). She retained those pieces as her personal property after the divorce.
 
There is a misunderstanding that Princess Diana had jewellery on loan from the Queen - she didn't they were hers to keep. The Queen does not lend wedding presents.

There's no question the jewels were intended for Diana to keep as she was a future Consort. However, no one contemplated at the time that Charles and Diana would divorce, so obviously these jewels were given with no thought of that possibility.

Once divorce became inevitable, The Queen ensured the jewels (which belonged to her as they were bequests from her grandmother) remained safe from being sold or lent. If she wanted to, she could have demanded all of her jewels back, but she didn't. She recognized Diana should have them as they were wedding gifts, but wanted to make sure they didn't end up somewhere else.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure if this was posted yet but here is a pic (the only one I've found) of Diana in the Spencer Honeysuckle tiara.

Note: this is a photoshopped image
 

Attachments

  • cb6efd18b36c1e66befd68faa5909bef.jpg
    cb6efd18b36c1e66befd68faa5909bef.jpg
    24 KB · Views: 629
Last edited by a moderator:
That photo was actually photshopped, by a member on this forum. ( I don't know if they are still around) It was done a really long time ago. They did do a great job, didn't they?
 
That photo was actually photshopped, by a member on this forum. ( I don't know if they are still around) It was done a really long time ago. They did do a great job, didn't they?

:ohmy: Oh no, that's too bad! Yes, they did a very good job and Diana would have looked great in that tiara. Thank you for letting me know :flowers:
 
She actually does do lifetime loans, and that was the arrangement they had with the Cambridge Lover's knot

I was just watching a documentary on Youtube on the royal jewels, and they had Suzy Menkes saying that the Lover's Knot, was not in fact a lifetime loan. That it was one of the few pieces which were an outright gift. I am on my daughter's laptop at the moment, but I have it bookmarked on my own and will put it up later.

The link wont work for me but go to Youtube to Resplendent Royalty's Channel The Royal Jewels Documentary at the 30 minute mark.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Suzy Menkes is not a member of the RF.

Her information may not be correct.

The only person who really knows the intent is the Queen.
 
She is the author of The Queens Jewels given access by QEII and proofed by the Queen.
 
There are so many statements or assertions of "fact" bandied about without any attribution that concern topics such as this.
If Suzy Menkes has gone on the record stating the Lover's Knot tiara was a gift and not a loan and there is no reliable source that says the opposite, chances are that she is correct.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom