The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #321  
Old 11-10-2018, 01:17 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,874
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nico View Post
There's a WHOLE exhibition called "Russia: Royalty & The Romanovs" opening today at the Queen's gallery at Buckingham Palace.
The Skripal poisonings crisis is probably less acute than last march but it is still fimly in people's mind.
Still the British Monarchy and the royal Collections are not in the least concerned about any backlash from showing items strongly related to Russia.
So a Tiara with an "hypothetical" small link to Russia would have caused a palace crisis ?
Ah ah ah give me a break !
That and Romanovs (who previously owned the tiara) has nothing to do with the current Russian government. And everyone knows HMQ owns Russian jewels. It’s not exactly a state secret.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #322  
Old 11-10-2018, 01:24 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 2,538
Now that The Times ran with the story I guess we will soon see the queen honour Meghan and Harry in some way, for I really really doubt that even if there was a grain of truth in it, the queen would want the people to think Meghan was anything but a asset to the Royal family - which she is, with a child coming and that success down under. IMHO, of course.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #323  
Old 11-10-2018, 01:54 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,537
The Queen does not have to do anything! The royal family will carry on as normal. This is Remembrance weekend and there are far more important things to do and think about.
Reply With Quote
  #324  
Old 11-10-2018, 02:00 PM
Nico's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 2,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kataryn View Post
Now that The Times ran with the story I guess we will soon see the queen honour Meghan and Harry in some way, for I really really doubt that even if there was a grain of truth in it, the queen would want the people to think Meghan was anything but a asset to the Royal family - which she is, with a child coming and that success down under. IMHO, of course.
If the Queen had to honour a member of the BRF each time a phony story is running about him/her, the whole firm would be knights of the Garter by now.
Reply With Quote
  #325  
Old 11-10-2018, 02:38 PM
Leopoldine's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nico View Post
There's a WHOLE exhibition called "Russia: Royalty & The Romanovs" opening today at the Queen's gallery at Buckingham Palace.
The Skripal poisonings crisis is probably less acute than last march but it is still fimly in people's mind.
Still the British Monarchy and the royal Collections are not in the least concerned about any backlash from showing items strongly related to Russia.
So a Tiara with an "hypothetical" small link to Russia would have caused a palace crisis ?
Ah ah ah give me a break !


Well, say for instance that Queen Mary acquired some Russian Imperial jewels back in the 1930's when the Soviet Government under Stalin was quietly selling off part of the collection. That would be a provenance best left unexamined.
Reply With Quote
  #326  
Old 11-10-2018, 02:44 PM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leopoldine View Post
Well, say for instance that Queen Mary acquired some Russian Imperial jewels back in the 1930's when the Soviet Government under Stalin was quietly selling off part of the collection. That would be a provenance best left unexamined.
Why? Better that the jewels are back with relatives in a known location than scattered to the 4 winds in various hidden collections.
Reply With Quote
  #327  
Old 11-10-2018, 02:44 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Bellevue, United States
Posts: 1,255
[QUOTE=Leopoldine;2169471]Well, say for instance that Queen Mary acquired some Russian Imperial jewels back in the 1930's when the Soviet Government under Stalin was quietly selling off part of the collection. That would be a provenance best left unexamined
Reply With Quote
  #328  
Old 11-10-2018, 02:47 PM
Nico's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 2,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leopoldine View Post
Well, say for instance that Queen Mary acquired some Russian Imperial jewels back in the 1930's when the Soviet Government under Stalin was quietly selling off part of the collection. That would be a provenance best left unexamined.
Nonsense ! It's a well known fact that Queen Mary acquired many Romanovs pieces during the 30's.

There's is even a dedicated page about it on the Royal Collections website !

https://www.rct.uk/collection/themes...yal-collection

Exemple for the famous Fabergé eggs : " Many of the imperial eggs were confiscated during the Revolution of 1917 and later sold to dealers and collectors in the West. Eight have disappeared and never been recovered. The three in the Royal Collection were acquired by King George V and Queen Mary in the 1930s."
Reply With Quote
  #329  
Old 11-10-2018, 03:39 PM
Tilia C.'s Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: O, Germany
Posts: 5,550
Please do keep on the topic of Meghan's wedding tiara.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #330  
Old 11-10-2018, 03:57 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 1,516
The whole story is ridiculous, Harry said himself he was with her and the Queen and they chose the one that went the best with her gown.
Reply With Quote
  #331  
Old 11-10-2018, 04:55 PM
MichelleQ2's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 1,211
Throwing my theory into the mix....

It sounds as though there may be some points of truth in this story after all but I think mixed with some journalistic embellishment.

I find it curious that the tiara in contention is an emerald tiara - and eugenie wore an emerald tiara. My theory is that eugenie picked her tiara first....perhaps it’s been a longtime favorite she played with her granny as a child. (Had to be something special for her not to wear the York tiara). This theory hold a little more water if you add in the rumors that eugenie and jack delayed their engagement/wedding for Harry & Megs. So many comparisons between the 2 weddings, you can’t fault a grandmother for wanting her granddaughter to have something of her own. So maybe if meg expressed an interest in an emerald tiara... HM steered meg away from it without disclosing Eugenie’s choice). Maybe Harry had told her there was one and knew meg had wanted an emerald, so he pushed back to Angela Kelly. That may have been how Harry ended up at what could have been the 2nd tiara viewing... and he came along to make sure Meghan was happy. ... and that is the story that was retold on the Windsor castle tour. Now I do believe Harry did say “whatever Meghan wants, Meghan gets”. Remembering that all of this was going on in the midst markel family drama - and Harry is very protective.

There are always going to be tough moments during wedding planning, so I’m sure there may have been sharp moments. Unfortunately when repeated they just add spice to the story.

All b
Reply With Quote
  #332  
Old 11-10-2018, 04:57 PM
Ista's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: the West, United States
Posts: 2,759
I don't believe this story, but I am extremely curious about this so called "evidence" that Valentine Low keeps on referencing. What kind of "evidence" could it be? A tape recording? Video camera footage? A signed affidavit from Harry that he lost his temper with his Gran and kicked one of her dorgis?

If what he is really claiming as evidence is a description of the purported events by a supposed eye-witness, then we're back at hearsay, which, depending on the motives of the witness, is open to question and interpretation. Barring something that actually is evidence, there are just too many things that don't hang together, from the fact that Meghan has never shown any preference for emeralds (if the tiara had been, say, opals or pearls or some other pale stone it might have had more credibility) the unlikelihood of Meghan throwing a tantrum, the unlikelihood of Harry having a tantrum at his grandmother, the unlikelihood of a tiara being offered without consideration of its provenance, and so on.

At this point I think everything points to this being about Jobson selling a book, and the media jumping on board for the ride.
Reply With Quote
  #333  
Old 11-10-2018, 05:00 PM
Tarlita's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Near Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 2,016
The only Emerald tiara owned by the Queen is the Greville tiara which Prss Eugenie wore.
The Grand Duchess Vladimir tiara was bought by Queen Mary in 1928 for £28,000. From the Grand Duchess Vladimirs daughter Elena. She was a cousin of Tsar Nicholas II and she inherited her mothers diamonds including this tiara.
The tiara in its original form comes with drop pearls swinging within the circles. Queen Mary had some of the Cambridge Emeralds made to replace the pearls when she felt like it. Doco's in the past show that each emerald is kept in a velvet jewellers bag, as the tiara is kept in its original form with the pearls. This tiara is not known as an emerald tiara. IF and its a big IF this tiara were shown to Meghan it would be in its original form with the pearls.

However, this tiara is a favourite of the Queens and would never be offered to anyone else.

I just assumed everyone would understand that this is a made up story by Jobson. From start to finish.
Reply With Quote
  #334  
Old 11-10-2018, 05:04 PM
Ista's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: the West, United States
Posts: 2,759
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichelleQ2 View Post
Throwing my theory into the mix....

It sounds as though there may be some points of truth in this story after all but I think mixed with some journalistic embellishment.

I find it curious that the tiara in contention is an emerald tiara - and eugenie wore an emerald tiara. My theory is that eugenie picked her tiara first....perhaps it’s been a longtime favorite she played with her granny as a child. (Had to be something special for her not to wear the York tiara). This theory hold a little more water if you add in the rumors that eugenie and jack delayed their engagement/wedding for Harry & Megs. So many comparisons between the 2 weddings, you can’t fault a grandmother for wanting her granddaughter to have something of her own. So maybe if meg expressed an interest in an emerald tiara... HM steered meg away from it without disclosing Eugenie’s choice). Maybe Harry had told her there was one and knew meg had wanted an emerald, so he pushed back to Angela Kelly. That may have been how Harry ended up at what could have been the 2nd tiara viewing... and he came along to make sure Meghan was happy. ... and that is the story that was retold on the Windsor castle tour. Now I do believe Harry did say “whatever Meghan wants, Meghan gets”. Remembering that all of this was going on in the midst markel family drama - and Harry is very protective.

There are always going to be tough moments during wedding planning, so I’m sure there may have been sharp moments. Unfortunately when repeated they just add spice to the story.

All b
I have wondered about this, too.
Reply With Quote
  #335  
Old 11-10-2018, 05:13 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,874
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichelleQ2 View Post
Throwing my theory into the mix....

It sounds as though there may be some points of truth in this story after all but I think mixed with some journalistic embellishment.

I find it curious that the tiara in contention is an emerald tiara - and eugenie wore an emerald tiara. My theory is that eugenie picked her tiara first....perhaps it’s been a longtime favorite she played with her granny as a child. (Had to be something special for her not to wear the York tiara). This theory hold a little more water if you add in the rumors that eugenie and jack delayed their engagement/wedding for Harry & Megs. So many comparisons between the 2 weddings, you can’t fault a grandmother for wanting her granddaughter to have something of her own. So maybe if meg expressed an interest in an emerald tiara... HM steered meg away from it without disclosing Eugenie’s choice). Maybe Harry had told her there was one and knew meg had wanted an emerald, so he pushed back to Angela Kelly. That may have been how Harry ended up at what could have been the 2nd tiara viewing... and he came along to make sure Meghan was happy. ... and that is the story that was retold on the Windsor castle tour. Now I do believe Harry did say “whatever Meghan wants, Meghan gets”. Remembering that all of this was going on in the midst markel family drama - and Harry is very protective.

There are always going to be tough moments during wedding planning, so I’m sure there may have been sharp moments. Unfortunately when repeated they just add spice to the story.

All b
The problem with that is I highly doubt Harry would’ve seen that emerald tiara when he was younger and now all of sudden thought it’d be perfect for Meghan and asked for it without it having been presented to them as a choice.

And why would Eugenie be choosing her tiara first? Even if she did, then HMQ wouldn’t have presented it to Meghan as a choice. And Eugenie and jack didn’t delay their engagement /wedding to accommodate Meghan and Harry. They weren’t even engaged by the time the date was announced for the Sussex wedding. They were together for 7 years and could’ve gotten engaged any time they liked. They didn’t.

Again, all possible theories about this seems to be based on some thought that Meghan really like emeralds. She has shown no inclination for emeralds.
Reply With Quote
  #336  
Old 11-10-2018, 05:43 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 14,982
If anything, this tabloid story is giving us a good run in playing the "what if" game.

The thing that stands out for me is this all happened *before* Harry and Meghan's wedding. Meghan is being offered a tiara to wear for the grand occasion by HM, The Queen. All I know that if I had been in Meghan's shoes at that point, I'd still be in awe of this lady even with having a good rapport with her so far. Gazing in awe at the tiaras spread out before me, I'd mostly be stunned to think that I could ever wear one of them and the last thing I'd think of doing is throwing a hissy fit of not getting my own way.
__________________
"All things are connected. Whatever befalls the earth befalls the sons of the earth. Man did not weave the web of life : he is merely a strand in it. Whatever he does to the web, he does to himself." - Chief Seattle 1854
Reply With Quote
  #337  
Old 11-10-2018, 06:34 PM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 9,414
When Meghan chose her tiara I believe it was from those HM offered and probably a couple of months or more before the wedding. I am sure that Angela, HM's trusty dresser was present when Meghan tried the options to ensure the tiaras were placed properly.

Two other people were present, Harry, who said he shouldn't really have been there but was probably being over-protective, and I cannot believe that HM was anywhere else but present watching and enjoying the goings-on. So that leaves four people present. Hmm.

The colour of Meghan's gown was blinding ice white and the star was to be the similarly coloured embroidered veil. A coloured gem tiara does not lend itself to the esthetic that Meghan aspired for her wedding.

As to HM's the jewellery, I think I remember from a documentary that when HM wanted something from the vault, she wrote a request and the boxes were delivered to her dresser so the idea of having an inappropriate tiara present is a total nonsense just as is the notion that there is a question mark over the provenance of any jewellery. The thought that there is jewellery in the vaults whose provenance or source of origin not clear is one thing, but that it is dubious enough for it to not be seen in public? I think not!
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #338  
Old 11-10-2018, 06:49 PM
soapstar's Avatar
Super Moderator
Picture of the Week Coordinator
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hermosa Beach, United States
Posts: 5,510
I’ve deleted a few comments. As the last mod note stated, this thread is about Meghan’s wedding tiara. It’s not about the tabloids/media and whether journalists have an agenda against Meghan. Let’s please stick to the topic. Any further off-topic posts will be deleted.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #339  
Old 11-10-2018, 06:54 PM
Abbigail's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Nashville, United States
Posts: 627
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
The problem with that is I highly doubt Harry would’ve seen that emerald tiara when he was younger and now all of sudden thought it’d be perfect for Meghan and asked for it without it having been presented to them as a choice.

And why would Eugenie be choosing her tiara first? Even if she did, then HMQ wouldn’t have presented it to Meghan as a choice. And Eugenie and jack didn’t delay their engagement /wedding to accommodate Meghan and Harry. They weren’t even engaged by the time the date was announced for the Sussex wedding. They were together for 7 years and could’ve gotten engaged any time they liked. They didn’t.

Again, all possible theories about this seems to be based on some thought that Meghan really like emeralds. She has shown no inclination for emeralds.
I will say again, I agree with this completely.

Reply With Quote
  #340  
Old 11-10-2018, 08:37 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Texas, United States
Posts: 3,688
The reactions in this whole thread represents why tabloids are kept in business. A lame story with credible sources but the majority in here believe it and take it as truth. What in any of Meghan's history points to her liking emerald or green or any flashy colors? Her engagement ring is basic and standard, her dress was basic, so why would she call for a green ostentatious tiara? And why would her tiara choices be presented differently than Kate's?
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
meghan markle, prince harry, prince harry of wales, tiara, wedding


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
Meghan Markle: Wedding Dress Suggestions and Musings soapstar Royal Style File 1819 05-19-2018 06:22 AM
Meghan Markle: Wedding Tiara and Jewelry Suggestions and Musings Tilia C. Royal Jewels General Discussion 999 05-19-2018 06:02 AM




Popular Tags
abdication american history anastasia 2020 belgian royal belgian royal family bridal gown canada chittagong clarence house coronavirus crown princess victoria danish royalty denmark dna dutch dutch royal family edo facts family tree fantasy movie future genealogy hill historical drama house of bernadotte house of glucksburg house of grimaldi imperial household japan jewelry jumma kent king salman languages list of rulers lithuania lithuanian palaces mail maxima mountbatten netflix nobel prize northern ireland norway norwegian royal family palestine princely family of monaco princess margaret queen paola random facts rown royal children royal dress-ups royal jewels royal re-enactments. royal wedding royal wedding gown serbian royal family settings startling new evidence state visit to denmark stuart sweden swedish history thai royal family tips tracts united kingdom von hofmannsthal working royals; full-time royals; part-time royals;


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:42 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises
×