Princess Eugenie of York's Wedding Tiara


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
wyevale said:
FAR too risky a stratagem imo.. why risk it? There is no need for ownership, lifetime, [or 'one off'] loans are sufficient, thus ensuring the Tiara always descends down the generations from on Monarch to the next, for them to lend out as they see fit.
Click to expand...
Hmm, that is what the Cambridge Lover's Knot was, a lifetime loan which is very sensible since Queen Mary decimated the vaults.

But I have to agree that the Greville Bucheron Emerald Kokoshnik looked terrific on Eugenie. Stylistically it matched her gown and was an altogether amazing surprise being the first Royal Bride to wear anything other than diamonds.
 
WillVictoria said:
I believe Muriel's post was written in response to another user who thought the ultimate plan was to have Charles inherit the tiara after the Queen's death and then, at his late mother's behest, gift the tiara to Eugenie in hopes he lived long enough to avoid the gift being taxed as an inheritance. In which case the tiara would leave the main line.
Click to expand...

Thank you WillVictoria, I was indeed referring to a suggestion by Kataryn that the Greville emerald tiara be interited by Eugenie. See my post 54 upthread for more details.

MARG said:
Hmm, that is what the Cambridge Lover's Knot was, a lifetime loan which is very sensible since Queen Mary decimated the vaults.
Click to expand...

Whether Queen Mary decimated or filled the vaults of the BRf is debatable. Whilst she gave a lot of jewellery to all her children, she had acquired an awful lot in her time as Consort. A lot of the current collection was acquired in her time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I LOVE THIS TIARA! I was positive it would be the York tiara, which I am not a fan of, so I am very happy.

I really wish the Queen was more generous with tiaras and tiara events. The things she has tucked away in her vaults, like this beauty and Meghan's tiara, deserve to be seen more!
 
Tilia C. said:
The tiara is really beautiful and I love that she wore it today. But her hair, make-up and big, beaming smile were so beautiful that she would have looked smashing with most other tiaras as well. Did you notice how strands of her hair were carefully pulled aside and arranged to cover the tiara base? That's the way to place a tiara!
Click to expand...

I was wondering if the base of the tiara was carefully wrapped in dyed-to-match hair. Whatever the details, it was an elegant solution for a tiara base.

I was really happy to see her in this tiara. I liked the entire ensemble -- the dress, earrings and that lovely tiara.

I had been distracted yesterday by her appearance in that interview, where her eyebrows seem very heavy. Today, that effect was toned down, but it did seem that Beatrice and Eugenie had unusually heavy eyebrow definition. I'm sorry if this is the wrong thread for this.

Today Eugenie looked so regal and beautiful. It was inspired to forego the veil.
 
Leopoldine said:
I was wondering if the base of the tiara was carefully wrapped in dyed-to-match hair. Whatever the details, it was an elegant solution for a tiara base.

I was really happy to see her in this tiara. I liked the entire ensemble -- the dress, earrings and that lovely tiara.

I had been distracted yesterday by her appearance in that interview, where her eyebrows seem very heavy. Today, that effect was toned down, but it did seem that Beatrice and Eugenie had unusually heavy eyebrow definition. I'm sorry if this is the wrong thread for this.

Today Eugenie looked so regal and beautiful. It was inspired to forego the veil.
Click to expand...
Me too!!! I was anxious regarding the weather and have been checking the weather report for Windsor UK a few times a day and then I saw those brows and my anxiety about the weather

was replaced with anxiety about those brows! :ohmy:


As you mentioned they were toned down for the wedding look, thank goodness! ?


I don't have anything against veils but I agree that it was an inspired choice.


Eugenie has red tones in her hair, that was another thing that made the tiara selected look so good.
 
Last edited:
I wondered if there were actually plans to wear a veil but due to the winds she decided to not wear one.


LaRae
 
"Eug" was firing on all cylinders today and her choice of tiara and hairstyle was no exception. She nailed it.;)
 
Something strange happening for me. I can open page 3 and page 5 but no matter what i do can't open page 4.
Sa la vie!
I imagine the Queen will or already has created a Royal collection where by jewels Not reserved for the Monarch or the Monarchs wife are available for other royal ladies to use Not to own. A bit like Swedens jewels are used by the sisters of the King.
So the jewels belong to the Royal collection for use.
I am a firm believer that we should see these beautiful jewels worn by ladies and not just kept hidden away or in museums. These old jewels are magnifient works of art and should be worn and admired. They are part of the English heritage after all.
 
Princess Eugenie looked lovely wearing the Greville Emerald Tiara. Emeralds are absolutely radiant!
 
I think the hair and tiara looked nice, and I did't mind the lack of a veil. but not keen on the dress so far. I love emeralds, myself and green stones, and I think they brought out a greenish colour in Eug's eyes..
 
Last edited:
To me if Eugenie is not a jewelry person or has no great affection for her wedding tiara, then it makes no sense to gift her her wedding tiara. But if Eugenie is a jewelry person and/or if wants to gaze lovingly at it, show it to her children and grandchildren while, pardon the pun, regaling them with stories of her wedding day, then I don't have a problem with that particular tiara being gifted/bequethed to her.

While absolutely lovely, the Greville Emerald Kokoshnik Tiara has no royal provenance other than being worn by Eugenie on her wedding day. Yes there is a very real likelihood that one of Eugenie's descendants will sell the tiara but that is not the same loss as say with Queen Victoria's Sapphire Coronet. The Sapphire Coronet was designed by Prince Albert for Queen Victoria, Victoria is depicted wearing that tiara in a Winterhalter painting and wore the tiara to open parliament, the first time she opened Parliament since Albert's death a few years earlier.
 
Queen Claude said:
To me if Eugenie is not a jewelry person or has no great affection for her wedding tiara, then it makes no sense to gift her her wedding tiara. But if Eugenie is a jewelry person and/or if wants to gaze lovingly at it, show it to her children and grandchildren while, pardon the pun, regaling them with stories of her wedding day, then I don't have a problem with that particular tiara being gifted/bequethed to her.

While absolutely lovely, the Greville Emerald Kokoshnik Tiara has no royal provenance other than being worn by Eugenie on her wedding day. Yes there is a very real likelihood that one of Eugenie's descendants will sell the tiara but that is not the same loss as say with Queen Victoria's Sapphire Coronet. The Sapphire Coronet was designed by Prince Albert for Queen Victoria, Victoria is depicted wearing that tiara in a Winterhalter painting and wore the tiara to open parliament, the first time she opened Parliament since Albert's death a few years earlier.
Click to expand...

Even if Eugenie loves the tiara and wants to spend the rest of her days gazing at it, she is unlikely to have many occasions to wear it. The Queen is better off, IMO, given Eugenie some cash or buying her a house, rather than the tiara. The tiara can and should be used by the ladies of the main line, ie Camilla and Catherine.
 
Princess Eugenie was such a beautiful bride. The Kokoshnik tiara was perfect choice. It complemented her features and was really well styled/placed into her hairstyle. She looked stunning and regal, like a fairytale princess. Everything - dress, jewellery, makeup, hair, flowers, - were spot on.
Please give us more surprises like this. Its always great to see old jewellery resurface again. Its a crime to hide those beautiful pieces away and never wear them.
 
To be honest - I don't understand the discussion about wether she should or should not have gotten the tiara as a gift because
a) she's not likely to have a lot of occasions to wear it or
b) ladies of the main line should wear it.
Fact is: the tiara obviously HASN'T been worn by any other member of the royal family in a long time.
Does it really matter, where it's "stored"? If any other female royal wanted to wear it, they could have done it, for sure. But to me it seems as if they didn't want, so where is the problem?
If someone starts to wear it now, then imo the only reason it because it looked perfect on Eugenie - and someone wants to get the same applaus.
 
Oooh, what a surprise! The Greville Emerald Kokoshnik is amazing. I'm thrilled Princess Eugenie wore this exquisite tiara, especially because I wished for her (and eventually Princess Beatrice) to wear a piece from the Queen or hidden in the vaults.

Hair and tiara placement are perfect.

I don't mind if this tiara was gifted to Princess Eugenie although that is extremely unlikely. Plenty of nobles and some royals don't have opportunities to wear tiaras. Should they all give up their jewels to the reigning main-line royal families? I'm sure there will be royal fans bemoaning the loss of Sweden's Modern Fringe tiara in 50+ years even though fans now are perfectly OK with it being given to Princess Madeleine.
 
Eugenie’s tiara is on my short list of best wedding tiaras ever. It’s so beautiful and perfectly suited for her.

And, I’ve said it before, but I love that she surprised everyone and didn’t wear the York tiara.
 
The tiara is fabulous! However, I hope that it isn't gifted to Eugenie because neither she or her descendants will have active roles in the monarchy...which means that the tiara will eventually be sold.

I use Diana, Princess of Wales as an example. She was a future Queen when she married and both the lover's knot pearl tiara (which Kate now wears) and the Cambridge emerald choker necklace were returned to the crown collection at her death.

I agree with others that the british royal jewel collection should be inherited by the monarchs and lifetime loans should be given to those who need it.

As it is now, I expect that the jewel collections of the Dukes of Glouchester and Kent will be sold to pay death taxes.
 
Last edited:
I think the Queen will simply agree to lend Eugenie the tiara anytime one is necessary. Given how many pieces have been apparently given out but then returned I suspect very few if any pieces have been given out permanently rather than just for even "lifetime loans".
 
muriel said:
Even if Eugenie loves the tiara and wants to spend the rest of her days gazing at it, she is unlikely to have many occasions to wear it. The Queen is better off, IMO, given Eugenie some cash or buying her a house, rather than the tiara. The tiara can and should be used by the ladies of the main line, ie Camilla and Catherine.
Click to expand...

Would lifetime loans be an option? I like the idea of any HRH/princess having her own tiara, however, preferably without the risk of it being sold at some point. I wouldn't be surprised if at some point (when the current cousins no longer attend) both Eugenie and Beatrice will be asked to join the family for banquets - just like prince and princess Michael of Kent are somewhat 'semi-active' royals; where a tiara would be expected of a royal princess.

So, for born princesses that could be managed by a lifetime loan and for princesses by marriage it would be available to (only) them as long as they are married (or unmarried widow).
 
Last edited:
Eugenie *might* wear a tiara once a year if that. No reason really to lifetime loan or give it to her. Her children won't be titled at this point...they will have very little need for it and may end up having to sell it off to pay for taxes etc.

Must better to leave it in the BRF vaults for her (or others) to use as needed.


LaRae
 
The thing about senior Royals, is that they are used to not owning important things, outside of the Monarch owning Sandringham and Balmoral. Prince Charles does not even own his suits, or the cars he regularly drives in. William and Catherine do not own their homes. They are Crown properties that they reside in, rent free. Even in the private residences, the art and furnishings are owned by The Crown.

So, the idea that being lent a valuable tiara is of less status than being given one is surely not even being considered. The Royal Family is rather dependent on the idea that everything belongs to the Duchys, or the Crown.
 
Leopoldine said:
The thing about senior Royals, is that they are used to not owning important things, outside of the Monarch owning Sandringham and Balmoral. Prince Charles does not even own his suits, or the cars he regularly drives in. William and Catherine do not own their homes. They are Crown properties that they reside in, rent free. Even in the private residences, the art and furnishings are owned by The Crown.

So, the idea that being lent a valuable tiara is of less status than being given one is surely not even being considered. The Royal Family is rather dependent on the idea that everything belongs to the Duchys, or the Crown.
Click to expand...


Most of the Queen's jewels are actually privately owned by Her Majesty, including the tiara that was borrowed by Eugenie.
 
Mbruno said:
Most of the Queen's jewels are actually privately owned by Her Majesty, including the tiara that was borrowed by Eugenie.
Click to expand...


Yes, and her heir will inherit them tax-free. The other senior royals own nothing of importance because of inheritance issues.
 
I gave my wife an emerald cut emerald engagement ring surrounded by diamonds. I think emeralds are exquisite, and that tiara should be in the possession of anyone that will wear it. Lifetime lone to a blood princess only.
 
muriel said:
Even if Eugenie loves the tiara and wants to spend the rest of her days gazing at it, she is unlikely to have many occasions to wear it. The Queen is better off, IMO, given Eugenie some cash or buying her a house, rather than the tiara. The tiara can and should be used by the ladies of the main line, ie Camilla and Catherine.
Click to expand...
IMO she does not need to wear it, gazing lovingly at the tiara is just as valid use of the objet as wearing it.

Eugenie does not need a house, she has lifetime use of the Royal Lodge and probably Ivy Cottage, as well as a ski chalet in Verbier which undoubtedly she and her sister will end up inheriting.

My observation is that the Queen does not loan out more than one tiara at a time and Camilla and Kate are locked into the Greville Boucheron and Lover's Knot tiaras respectively due to their husbands great affection for the previous wearers of those tiaras. Now maybe things will change under Charles' reign but it is not as if there is a paltry selection.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Marengo
  • Sticky
United Kingdom: Birthday and Anniversary Wishes 2024
2 3
Replies
63
Views
4K
Biri
B
muriel
Princess of Wales: Future Tiaras and Jewellery
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
doro
doro
Marengo
Princess Eugenie, Jack Brooksbank and Family, Current Events 2: Sep 2022-
3 4 5
Replies
145
Views
15K
Snowangel
Snowangel
Marengo
Scoop (2024) Netflix Film about the Newsnight Interview of the Duke of York
Replies
9
Views
1K
victor1319
V
A
Princess Beatrice and Eugenie jewels
2 3
Replies
61
Views
4K
MARG
MARG

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom