Duchess of Cornwall Jewellery 7: September 2011- December 2015


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
scooter said:
A lot of times a piece like that can be worn several ways to make it more versatile. Usually a brooch can also be worn as a pendant or pearl enhancer. Though this particular stone (which I think is a padparadscha sapphire not an amethyst) would be far to large to wear that way.
Click to expand...

Pink Sapphire or Topaz it is an absolutely exquisite piece !!
 
As can be seen from the pictures, Camilla's Van Cleef & Arpel earrings got an outing again in Mumbai
 
:previous: She wears it well. The gown complements the jewels well.
 
Her wardrobe for this trip has been wonderful. The blue gown is lovely and the Boucheron...well, it sparkles!!!
 
All hail the Mighty Bouch - the grandest of the "go big or go home" tiaras. It looks great on her and she looks really comfortable wearing it, too.
 
Last edited:
She wears it well. It is flattering, not overwhelming (considering its size!) and IMO suits her. I can see why it seems to be her go-to tiara! Lovely pictures.
 
Because she doesn't have another one, except the more modest family tiara, that she brought with her.
 
:previous:

Well not exactly. She already wore once the Delhi Durbar tiara, loaned by the Queen in 2005. We can suppose that it's still at her disposal.
Secondly the book "the Queen's Diamonds" taught us that another tiara, the Teck crescent, is at her disposal too.
We can imagine that the Mighty Bouch is her favourite for various reasons (style, weight ...).
So Camilla has basically access to at least 4 tiaras (including, indeed, the Shand Tiara).
 
Last edited:
When did she get the Teck Crescent? That was being speculated as the tiara for Kate before the wedding.
 
scooter said:
When did she get the Teck Crescent? That was being speculated as the tiara for Kate before the wedding.
Click to expand...

She's worn the Teck Crescent before but it was a while ago. You can see it here:
The Royal Order of Sartorial Splendor: Flashback Friday: A Few of Camilla's Sparkliest Things

I don't quite care for it on her, it's either the way she is wearing it or it's just too small for her head/hair.


Does anyone have a new picture of Camilla wearing the Shand Tiara after her marriage to Charles?
 
Last edited:
Camilla is wearing the Cubitt Shand tiara in the third photo of the link which is definitely too small and gets lost in her hair. This is a better view of her daughter wearing the tiara on her wedding day.

We have yet to see Camilla wear the Teck Tiara.
 
Last edited:
Nico said:
:previous:

Well not exactly. She already wore once the Delhi Durbar tiara, loaned by the Queen in 2005. We can suppose that it's still at her disposal.
Secondly the book "the Queen's Diamonds" taught us that another tiara, the Teck crescent, is at her disposal too.
We can imagine that the Mighty Bouch is her favourite for various reasons (style, weight ...).
So Camilla has basically access to at least 4 tiaras (including, indeed, the Shand Tiara).
Click to expand...

I, believe, the Delhi Durbar, was a short time loan, never to be seen, again. The Teck Crescent is also being questioned by others. She received the Boucheron, as it is a Charles', inheritance, to which he will never pay tax, as his mother has received as a Sovereign to Sovereign exchange, to avoid paying taxes. A great scam. Camilla wears the only engagement ring that is on loan, to avoid taxes.
 
COUNTESS said:
I, believe, the Delhi Durbar, was a short time loan, never to be seen, again. The Teck Crescent is also being questioned by others. She received the Boucheron, as it is a Charles', inheritance, to which he will never pay tax, as his mother has received as a Sovereign to Sovereign exchange, to avoid paying taxes. A great scam. Camilla wears the only engagement ring that is on loan, to avoid taxes.
Click to expand...

your glass is not half full, it is empty.
 
cepe said:
COUNTESS said:
I, believe, the Delhi Durbar, was a short time loan, never to be seen, again. The Teck Crescent is also being questioned by others. She received the Boucheron, as it is a Charles', inheritance, to which he will never pay tax, as his mother has received as a Sovereign to Sovereign exchange, to avoid paying taxes. A great scam. Camilla wears the only engagement ring that is on loan, to avoid taxes.
Click to expand...

cepe said:
your glass is not half full, it is empty.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Good call. :ROFLMAO:

OK, now I know we've been through this before but one more time, just for you . . . we don't know anything about the Dehli Durbar, have only a hint about the Teck Crescent and reasonably deduce that the Bucheron is a life time gift.

Fact: All, repeat all, of HMQM's jewellery was left to her daughter Queen Elizabeth. It was not and never has been Charle's inheritance! That HM has gifted Camilla the use of the Bucheron is no more surprising than her gifting Catherine the use of the Halo Scroll.

That HM gave her mother's ring to Charles is as obvious as his giving it to Camilla as an engagement ring. Where on earth did you get the idea that it is only a loan? Worse than that, that Camilla only wears it as tax avoidance?

What man "loans" his wife her engagement ring? I don't know what it's like where you come from but where I come from handing down family jewellery such as my Grandmother's ring, and my Mother then gifting the same ring to one of her daughters is a perfectly natural occurance. Nothing wierd, strange, evil or illegal.

What is both weird and strange is your continual venting about the supposed great scam and that Charles is some sort of diabolically Machiavellian tax cheat.
 
I think the crescent tiara will be lost in her hair unless she miraculously styles it differently. I don't see that happening. She doesn't vary her hairstyle one iota.
 
What is both weird and strange is your continual venting about the supposed great scam and that Charles is some sort of diabolically Machiavellian tax cheat.
Click to expand...

Hear,hear... It is obvious that Countess is no devotee of the Prince, and his wife ! No opportunity to snipe at them is passed over...
 
Since i'm not a fan of the crescent tiara [ I find the design very odd indeed ] I hope Charles will break it up and use the stones, and the diamonds and rubies from Camilla's Saudi 'breastplate', to create something better and more suited to his wife's considerable style. The BRF is in dire need of a ruby 'makeover', and has no shortage of raw materials...
 
Just to clarify, this is the Teck Crescent Tiara which is a lovely design and which we have yet to see Camilla wear. The third tiara in this link is the small Cubitt Shand Tiara which is Camilla's personal property.This is a better view of her daughter wearing the Cubitt. It's fairly clear that the two pieces are different.
 
Last edited:
wyevale said:
Since i'm not a fan of the crescent tiara [ I find the design very odd indeed ] I hope Charles will break it up and use the stones, and the diamonds and rubies from Camilla's Saudi 'breastplate', to create something better and more suited to his wife's considerable style. The BRF is in dire need of a ruby 'makeover', and has no shortage of raw materials...
Click to expand...
:eek::eek::eek: Breaking up a piece that goes back to Queen Mary's mother??? One just doesn't destroy such family heirlooms, they are historical. It would make my heart bleed....

Besides, I like the crescent tiara very much. Imo, it is better than all the contemporary tiaras I have seen so far.
 
I had the most awful thought about this. What if when...
The Queen went through the boxes looking at baubles to loan to The Duchess of Cornwall.
She came across the Teck crescent tiara and necklace and handed them to Camilla saying something like"These are just too horrid on, but dear Mummy loved them. You can have them remade into something that suits you after I am gone." Or something like that.
Or the Queen could have said, "I give you these in hopes that after I am gone, you can wear them without the DM writing about how you are sending secret code to Islamic militants.";)
 
wyevale said:
Hear,hear... It is obvious that Countess is no devotee of the Prince, and his wife ! No opportunity to snipe at them is passed over...
Click to expand...

Actually, I have come to like her. And he is who he is, neither good nor bad. I wasn't sniping at them, actually, I was sniping at the very brilliant system that the sovereigns put together for themselves, to avoid taxes on very expensive pieces. While others are denied that. So, Charles who, really, inherited all this stuff from his grandmother, will never be bothered by the large taxes, he would have to pay if they were directly given to him. He didn't invent this system, it is not his fault. But it is a scam, to let those who can most afford, inherit with out the heavy duty the rest pay. What I said is Camilla's engagement ring is borrowed. So, no taxes are paid. Who borrows a ring to give as engagement ring. The same with the tiara. Camilla looks great in it, but it is just on loan. Until HM dies and it becomes theirs free and clear.
 
:previous: Umm, No. Camilla's engagement ring may have belonged originally to his grandmother but it now belongs to Camilla. It is not a "lifetime loan" like the Boucheron or Halo, it is an engagement ring. What is it about this situation do you not understandf? Is it the fact it was left to his mother or the fact that she gave it to Charles? Regardless, he gave it to his fiance as an engagement ring. Like most every other wife in the western world, it is hers to keep on the day she married.
 
Well, not quite, Marg. The engagement ring is the fiancee's to keep when she receives it.
I think Camillia wears the Greville tiara beautifully, it is one of my faves and great to see it worn.
Are the wonderful diamond earrings also part of that bequest? They look newer.
 
:previous: That would have been my first supposition but I was just leaving contingency room for the return of the ring should the engagement be broken, which is obviously not the case here. However, it seems that the devil is indeed in the detail in this case. :wacko:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Marengo
Queen Camilla Jewels 2: February 2024 -
2
Replies
42
Views
4K
Catharina
Catharina
Marengo
Princess Caroline Jewellery 2, Oct 2023 -
Replies
4
Views
1K
An Ard Ri
An Ard Ri
Marengo
Jordanian Royal Jewels 2: Jan 2024 -
Replies
0
Views
647
Marengo
Marengo
Stefan
Queen Mary of Denmark Jewels 1: 14 Jan 2024 -
2 3
Replies
63
Views
13K
Queen Claude
Queen Claude
Tilia C.
Crown Princess Marie-Chantal Jewels 2: 2023 -
Replies
1
Views
656
doro
doro

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom