The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Royal Highlights > Royal Jewels

Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #101  
Old 05-19-2011, 06:58 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
William and Harry each inherited about $35 million, net of death duties, from Diana's estate and are certainly very well-off. Because William will become The Duke of Cornwall and control the duchy's income eventually, Harry also inherited approximately $15 million in total from both The Queen Mother and The Earl Spencer as well.

So, William can afford to buy Catherine whatever jewels she needs or wants. And she undoubtedly will wear many of Diana's jewels in the future as well as have her own that she received as wedding gifts.
__________________

__________________
  #102  
Old 05-20-2011, 01:20 PM
muriel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,288
Not sure where you got your numbers from, but from memory, Diana's estate was about 22m in all, so about $40m. Not sure how that translates to $35m each
__________________

__________________
  #103  
Old 05-21-2011, 04:35 AM
monica17's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Little Baguio, Philippines
Posts: 820
Quote:
Originally Posted by branchg View Post
William and Harry each inherited about $35 million, net of death duties, from Diana's estate and are certainly very well-off. Because William will become The Duke of Cornwall and control the duchy's income eventually, Harry also inherited approximately $15 million in total from both The Queen Mother and The Earl Spencer as well.

So, William can afford to buy Catherine whatever jewels she needs or wants. And she undoubtedly will wear many of Diana's jewels in the future as well as have her own that she received as wedding gifts.
"Very well off" is certainly different from RICH-RICH. Prince William's (personal) wealth is not among the biggest in the UK, much less the world. And I"m talking about NOW, not when Prince William becomes Prince of Wales and gets the income of the Duchy of Cornwall. I understand Prince Charles derives about 12 M from the duchy annually but can't touch the other assets associated with it, aside from the income.

I'm not even sure of your figures and of your statement that he can buy her whatever she wants or needs. What's $35 M in the grand scheme of things (composed of stocks, jewels, certainly NOT all in cash)? Think of the Wittelsbach diamond for instance, sold for 16.4 M in 2008, and that's just a single diamond. If William buys that or a similarly priced jewel, there would be not much left of his (as you've stated) US$35 M assets. So it's not as if he can buy her that without making a big dent on his assets, let alone a bunch of similar items.

Frankly, I can't see Kate owning such similarly valued jewels or even Diana's hand me down personal jewels coming close to that. Having them on loan, yes, I doubt if we'll see her own fabulous jewels like those in the past! Diana's hand me down engagement ring is not even valued at half of 1M now, let alone anywhere near the value of Wittelsbach diamond. I hope you get my point/perspective.
__________________
Monica17

Kindness is the magic elixir of love - The Practice of Kindness
  #104  
Old 05-21-2011, 07:18 AM
Elly C's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Worcester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,914

Why do you think it is unlikely that Kate will "inherit" some of Diana's personal jewels? I would have thought this was quite likely.

Over the next few years I think Kate will be given some impressive jewellery both from state visits and within the Royal family. This may not be in large numbers, but given her eventual destiny as a future Queen, she will gradually build up an impressive collection.
__________________
  #105  
Old 05-21-2011, 09:32 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 423
Prince William and Kate Middleton's future - CBS News Video

very funny and tender moment at 3.48

ETA.. Sorry, not the right video. Go in the column on the right and choose Modern Majesty: the rules of engagment
__________________
  #106  
Old 05-21-2011, 01:18 PM
teruterubouzu's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: somewhere, United States
Posts: 23
That was a cute and very human moment. It is weird, but I don't think I've ever seen video of either of them before where they weren't "on".
__________________
  #107  
Old 05-22-2011, 12:51 AM
monica17's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Little Baguio, Philippines
Posts: 820
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elly C View Post

Why do you think it is unlikely that Kate will "inherit" some of Diana's personal jewels? I would have thought this was quite likely.

Over the next few years I think Kate will be given some impressive jewellery both from state visits and within the Royal family. This may not be in large numbers, but given her eventual destiny as a future Queen, she will gradually build up an impressive collection.
No, what I meant is that is that Diana's personal jewels aren't as impressive nor as valuable as the ones owned by past royals, i.e. the Wittelsbach diamond originally owned by Infanta Margarita Teresa of Spain (and similar items). I know very well that Prince William inherited part of his late mother's jewels so naturally whatever items he got from her will likely be given to his wife and/or future children (or spouses thereof).

I think I've read that jewels given on state visits aren't automatically personal property either. And whatever British Crown Jewels she may wear are just on loan, never to be personal property of an individual, so whatever "impressive collection" it may amount, most of the jewels will not be Kate's per se. There might be personal gifts of jewels within the royal family, yes, but not on the scale of the earlier centuries.

That is why I'm not very convinced that Kate will have a very impressive collection (compared to past royals) of her own jewels (i.e. personal property). If you look up the royal jewels (mostly owned personally by princesses and queens, with a few exceptions) of the past, you'll understand what I mean. Those were on a different scale and category, which we won't likely see these days.
__________________
Monica17

Kindness is the magic elixir of love - The Practice of Kindness
  #108  
Old 05-22-2011, 08:29 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: everywhere, United States
Posts: 566
You make a great point. Of her engagement and wedding jewelry the only thing that belongs to her is the earrings and her wedding band. The tiara is a loaner from the Queen and the engagement ring belongs to the brothers.

As for what she might get in the future, I too think it will mostly be loaners as William does not seem keen on buying her new stuff. I know he does not have what some people would consider a lot of money and maybe Kate does not like big jewels. Either way, I think we will not see a lot of new stuff. I do not consider this bad because in This climate you do not want to seem to flashy among other reasons.
__________________
  #109  
Old 05-22-2011, 08:35 PM
HRHduchesskate's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 44
I would love to see Kate wear some of Diana's jewels, yet expensive jewellery doesn't seem her style...........yet. I always thought of all Diana's pieces the lovers know tiara was just amazing, She returned it to the Queen after the divorce though.
  #110  
Old 05-22-2011, 09:06 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: everywhere, United States
Posts: 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRHduchesskate View Post
I would love to see Kate wear some of Diana's jewels, yet expensive jewellery doesn't seem her style...........yet. I always thought of all Diana's pieces the lovers know tiara was just amazing, She returned it to the Queen after the divorce though.

I personally think she needs to branch out. She has the ring, as a loaner, what not try something else.
__________________
  #111  
Old 05-22-2011, 10:46 PM
MRSJ's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: ******, United States
Posts: 1,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by jemagre

I personally think she needs to branch out. She has the ring, as a loaner, what not try something else.
A loaner? What's that mean? As soon as he put it on her finger it became her engagement ring....so now it's hers, not a loan
__________________
  #112  
Old 05-22-2011, 11:08 PM
Aliza's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Posts: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRHduchesskate View Post
I would love to see Kate wear some of Diana's jewels, yet expensive jewellery doesn't seem her style...........yet. I always thought of all Diana's pieces the lovers know tiara was just amazing, She returned it to the Queen after the divorce though.
Diana did NOT return the Lovers Knot Tiara, nor any other Royal Family Jewellery after the divorce. Just look at her last formal engagement, on her birthday in 1997 - she is wearing the Cambridge emerald Queen Mary choker. She was required by the divorce agreement to return these pieces upon death, that is they were not her personal property. I do not know what conditions would have applied if she had remarried.

The Queen "gave" Diana the Lovers Knot Tiara as a wedding gift. HM has way too much class to ask for something like that back, especially when she knew that Diana was certainly not a thief, to say the least.

Check Paul Burrell's books for more info on this subject; he discusses it in detail when he is writing about Earl Spencer asking Diana for the Spencer Tiara to be returned when he had a tiff with his sister. He specifically says that Diana "at least was able to keep" the one from the Queen.

Hope this info clarifies the subject somewhat. I wish I knew the entire story, but I doubt that anyone not privy to the divorce agreement can come up with the entire truth.
__________________
  #113  
Old 05-22-2011, 11:41 PM
MRSJ's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: ******, United States
Posts: 1,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aliza

Diana did NOT return the Lovers Knot Tiara, nor any other Royal Family Jewellery after the divorce. Just look at her last formal engagement, on her birthday in 1997 - she is wearing the Cambridge emerald Queen Mary choker. She was required by the divorce agreement to return these pieces upon death, that is they were not her personal property.
Hmmm I thought that choker was a gift from Charles? Maybe I am thinking of the wrong choker..... Did Diana ever wear a tiara after her divorce became official, I honestly can't remember..... ?

I find Paul Burrel to be a less than reputable source or man in my opinion so I discount anything he says....
__________________
  #114  
Old 05-23-2011, 01:02 AM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,286
It's hers now. I believe that it was considered Diana's personal jewelery.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jemagre View Post
The tiara is a loaner from the Queen and the engagement ring belongs to the brothers.
__________________
  #115  
Old 05-23-2011, 01:08 AM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,286
Diana's last tiara occasion was during the State Visit of the King of Malaysia in November, 1993. She wore an emerald dress, a tiara, and the emerald choker. Here's a link to a picture: http://www.gettyimages.ca/detail/567...-Photo-Library


Quote:
Originally Posted by MRSJ View Post
..... Did Diana ever wear a tiara after her divorce became official, I honestly can't remember..... ?
__________________
  #116  
Old 05-23-2011, 01:30 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: San Francisco, United States
Posts: 2,044
Quote:
Originally Posted by MRSJ View Post
A loaner? What's that mean? As soon as he put it on her finger it became her engagement ring....so now it's hers, not a loan
Under "normal" circumstances the engagement ring belongs to the groom until the wedding has taken place. At the moment of the wedding the ring becomes the property of the bride. However, in respect to heirlooms the ownership is often spelled out and clarified in either pre-nuptial or other agreements. In most families it is very important to keep heirlooms in the family and therefore the disposition of them in case of death or divorce is pre-determined. We don't know what would happen to Diana's/Catherine's ring in case she would become a widow or divorcee.
__________________
  #117  
Old 05-23-2011, 03:22 AM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,286
As I understand it, the engagement ring is a gift to the fiancee. That's why a woman isn't strictly required to return an engagement ring if the engagement is broken, although it's seen as being in good taste to return it.
__________________
  #118  
Old 05-23-2011, 03:44 AM
auntie's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Middlesex, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,503
Quote:
Originally Posted by grevinnan View Post
Under "normal" circumstances the engagement ring belongs to the groom until the wedding has taken place. At the moment of the wedding the ring becomes the property of the bride. However, in respect to heirlooms the ownership is often spelled out and clarified in either pre-nuptial or other agreements. In most families it is very important to keep heirlooms in the family and therefore the disposition of them in case of death or divorce is pre-determined. We don't know what would happen to Diana's/Catherine's ring in case she would become a widow or divorcee.
I can't believe that Catherine would have to return the ring in any case, it is in good taste though not to continue wearing it in the case of divorce, or even if a widow remarries. There could be however strings attached, that it remain in their branch of the family, only to be inherited to so and so. the case of a divorcee wearing jewels she recieved from her former husband at her second wedding was allegedly Alexandra, countessof Fredricswhatever, who wore earings and a necklace Joachim gave her for the birth of one of her children, in bad taste
__________________
  #119  
Old 05-23-2011, 06:47 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Berkshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 643
Please can I help with a little background information?

Under English law, the general rule is that the engagement ring belongs to the fiancee as soon as it is given to her, even if the marriage then does not take place!! If the engagement is broken, a true 'lady' (in the sense of manners and breeding) returns it to the young man, but in English law, the ring is hers to keep.

There is one proviso, if the ring is an 'heirloom' ring, there is a possibility that the young man might be able to convince a court that there was an 'implied' term that the ring was only to be retained if the marriage went ahead etc. / did not end in divorce etc. But believe you me, it was previously VERY hard to establish this.

The situation might be altered in a pre-nuptual agreement if the ring is specifically mentioned, but even then, the court may not necessarily have to follow this term of the pre-nuptual agrement. However, we have been told in The Times that BP has stated that William and Catherine do NOT have a 'pre-nup'.

As I understood the terms of Charles and Diana's Divorce, it was part of the agreement that Diana was still to be regarded as a member of the BRF and would continue to receive invitations to important state occasions etc. One of the terms of the agreement was that she would also retain 'for life' the 'non-personal /state-type' of jewellery she had been given [It's hard to know what to call it - it is not strictly 'Crown' jewellery but it is that category of jewellery which basically belongs to the 'BRF' rather than the individual. Note how many countries give presents of jewellery to visiting royals: if it is given to someone other than the Queen, it is generally regarded as NOT a personal present to the royal recipient concerned: if it was regarded as property, then it would be TAXABLE! I remember when Camilla was spotted wearing some lovely jewellery - it emerged that it was a gift from an Arab Crowned Head that Charles and Camilla had visited: and BP then had to announce that it was not 'Camilla's to keep.

Regarding William: yes, he is not 'Rich Rich Rich', but he and Harry are quite exceptionally wealthy young men and can easily afford to buy very expensive 'statement pieces' for their wives [in due course in Harry's case!]. By way of comparison, could I mention Prince Andrew, who is on paper much less well off than William and Harry [who received money from their mother and also, in Harry's case, a legacy from the Queen Mother]. Prince Andrew bought Sarah quite a lot of personal jewellery - from Cartier and Garrard and the like. This was 'hers to keep'; in fact Sarah 'did better' than Diana in one respect, as the Princess had a lot of 'heirloom' jewellery as well as 'official presents' jewellery.

Re the 'Spencer Family Tiara'. Regardless of what Paul Burrell may have said [I never read the book], 'Family Tiaras' such as the Spencer Tiara ALWAYS remain the property of the Aristocratic Family Male line [they are part of the 'entail' and pass to the heir along with the house etc etc]. Diana might have retained the physical use of the Spencer tiara, not under any sense of true legal physical custody, but [I presume] because she would have the most occasion to use it. In practice, since harldy anyone except the Queen gives huge 'white tie' parties any more etc etc, it is only State occasions and Royal parties when a tiara could possibly be worn [apart from by the bride at a marriage]. There would have been precious few occasions when Earl Spencer's consort would have been able to wear a tiara.

Hope some of this helps,
Alex

As to whether Catherine is a 'jewellery person' - well, here's a thought! I was looking back at some of my old 'royal information' at the weekend, and some of it was pre-the wedding of Charles and Camilla. The Broadsheet papers were continually carrying well-sourced reports saying that 'Camilla is NOT intersted in Clothes [she has only one ballgown - an old taffeta number]. Camilla is NOT interested in spending loads of time at the hairdresser etc as she is a 'hunting, shooting, fishing' type of girl. Camilla is NOt interested in Jewellery etc etc.

In other words, pre-marriage she was being painted as a 'no-nonsense Princess Royal-type of person'

Yet look at what has happened:


Camilla's hair is very blonde, from contant visits to the hairdresser. She wears los of designer clothers. She has a substantial collection of personal jewellery from Prince Charles. In short, Camilla has not remained the 'Princess Royal type of person'.

Catherine may be doing the 'Hight Street Fashion Princess' routine at the moment but I get the impression that we will be seeing her 'sparkle' in the not too distant future.

Got to rush off now to Chelsea Flower Show for the Preview day and some serious 'Royal Spotting'

Hope some of this helps.

Alex
__________________
  #120  
Old 05-23-2011, 10:10 AM
monica17's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Little Baguio, Philippines
Posts: 820
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diarist View Post

Regarding William: yes, he is not 'Rich Rich Rich', but he and Harry are quite exceptionally wealthy young men and can easily afford to buy very expensive 'statement pieces' for their wives [in due course in Harry's case!].

Hope some of this helps.

Alex
Thanks Alex. I mostly agree on your last post.

I guess being 'quite exceptionally wealthy' and 'very expensive statement pieces' are relative. What is expensive for one might not be so from another perspective, and the same with being quite exceptionally wealthy. My main interest, and if one may call it an 'expertise' are the royals of 16th-18th centuries, specifically the Habsburgs. That was a different era, with different standards, much more luxurious, expensive and opulent than now. Even present royals can't compete with the old standard of living and jewels; that is why my main reference point is the Wittelsbach diamond, among others.
__________________

__________________
Monica17

Kindness is the magic elixir of love - The Practice of Kindness
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Duke and Duchess of Cambridge Current Events Thread 2: 1 December 2011 - 1 April 2012 Zonk Current Events Archive 887 04-03-2012 10:16 PM
Duchess of Cambridge current events 1: 29 April 2011- 31 January 2012 wbenson Current Events Archive 1025 02-01-2012 05:47 PM
Duke and Duchess of Cambridge current events 1: 29 April 2011- 30 November 2011 wbenson Current Events Archive 1081 12-01-2011 01:42 PM




Popular Tags
belgium brussels carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion genealogy germany grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jordan king carl xvi gustav king constantine ii king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander letizia luxembourg nobility official visit olympic games ottoman pieter van vollenhoven poland president hollande prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince daniel prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess ariane princess astrid princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary queen anne-marie queen fabiola queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:59 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]