The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #341  
Old 11-10-2018, 09:36 PM
Leopoldine's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 649
I think that the main question is ….

Is there another fabulous emerald and diamond tiara in HM's collection?
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #342  
Old 11-10-2018, 10:01 PM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
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?
Why do you say the story has credible sources and the majority here believe it? It seems like just the opposite to me.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #343  
Old 11-10-2018, 11:57 PM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 9,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abbigail View Post
I will say again, I agree with this completely.

Just a note that the Breville Emerald Kokoshnik was in the possession of the QM at Clarence House until her death and hadn't been worn.

The reason I believe it was chosen even months before her wedding was that it was that the back of her gown that the focus so the tiara would have to carry the entire action all the way up the aisle with no veil and so needed to be pretty special and very unique. Viola!
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #344  
Old 11-11-2018, 12:21 AM
JennahPc's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 77
This story is likely rubbish however, there is the possibility that she may have been gifted an emerald tiara and with the past historical significance unknown was forced to borrow one from HM. She was a Hollywood actress. They are used to borrowing gems and dresses for events.
Reply With Quote
  #345  
Old 11-11-2018, 01:07 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 15,831
It’s 2018 and the media still making it seem like the female newcomers are difficult and have to be put in their place by The Queen. This was done to Meghan’s late Mother-in-law and her ex aunt-in-law. It’s sexist and tired.

I guess the media and some folks online decided to ignore the fact the Meghan stated the lovely experience she had choosing tiaras with The Queen and Harry.
__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
  #346  
Old 11-11-2018, 01:36 AM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 9,414
You are right, there is no evidence whatsoever that there was an issue regarding tiaras of any shape, style or colour and we are letting the insidious fairytales of members of the media who are known for creating stories make us wonder if . . . . Shame on them and shame on us. We should all know better.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #347  
Old 11-11-2018, 01:45 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 15,831
Quote:
Originally Posted by MARG View Post
You are right, there is no evidence whatsoever that there was an issue regarding tiaras of any shape, style or colour and we are letting the insidious fairytales of members of the media who are known for creating stories make us wonder if . . . . Shame on them and shame on us. We should all know better.
We should indeed.
__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
  #348  
Old 11-11-2018, 03:11 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 2,538
And let's not forget that surely a lot of "Palace insiders" (probably including HM's ladies in waiting,all quite old now and from the nobility) are conservatives and for them Meghan is surely not what they considered a Royal bride to be: biracial, twice married.. I found it interesting that the story about HM's opinion about a veil was told, even though we all discarded that as nonsense because of the way that veil is on display now. But I can imagine some elderly lady thinking so and putting words in HM's mouth she wishes she herself could say to Meghan in person but can't. While the queen does not seem like the type to destroy Meghan's and Harry's fun because of old-fashioned thinking. Once she agreed to a religious wedding (think Charles/Camilla), I highly doubt that she had problems with a bride wearing a veil.
Reply With Quote
  #349  
Old 11-11-2018, 03:17 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 10,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kataryn View Post
And let's not forget that surely a lot of "Palace insiders" (probably including HM's ladies in waiting,all quite old now and from the nobility) are conservatives and for them Meghan is surely not what they considered a Royal bride to be: biracial, twice married.. I found it interesting that the story about HM's opinion about a veil was told, even though we all discarded that as nonsense because of the way that veil is on display now. But I can imagine some elderly lady thinking so and putting words in HM's mouth she wishes she herself could say to Meghan in person but can't. While the queen does not seem like the type to destroy Meghan's and Harry's fun because of old-fashioned thinking. Once she agreed to a religious wedding (think Charles/Camilla), I highly doubt that she had problems with a bride wearing a veil.
"A palace source" can also mean: completely sucked ouf of a thumb.
Reply With Quote
  #350  
Old 11-11-2018, 04:13 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 5,849
The tiara story would have been more credible if the Times could have identified exactly which tiara Meghan had allegedly chosen to wear. As the story stands, it is difficult to think of an emerald and diamond set in the Queen's collection whose provenance would be doubtful.
Reply With Quote
  #351  
Old 11-11-2018, 04:26 AM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Empress Merel View Post
I don't believe this story for the simple fact that Meghan's interest in color is slim to none. It was stated that every piece, from veil to tiara to dress, was to create a LOOK and nothing was to interfere with the magnificent veil. An emerald tiara wouldn't have suited.

Two different weddings, two different brides, two different looks.
Exactly. And from looking at the tiara the Queen has worn that's being purported as the one Meghan selected, it doesn't make sense because that tiara (previously worn by the Queen) would not have been offered to Meghan as a possible selection.

As I mentioned earlier, and others have noted as well, Duchess Meghan's taste in jewelry has been for simple, delicate pieces, not elaborate colored stones. The only colored gem I can recall Meghan wearing is the gorgeous to-die-for aquamarine ring of Diana's (made by Asprey) that Harry gifted to Meghan, and she wore with her Stella McCartney after-party dress, and later with the white Theia dress on the recent tour. Meghan's engagement ring is made of diamonds, and indeed diamonds suit her. An emerald tiara would have detracted from the gorgeous veil, and the simplicity of Meghan's dress, whereas the Diamond Bandeau tiara was perfect! It enhanced the veil, the dress, and Meghan's coloring.

I think this story was made up piecemeal after the royal wedding exhibit audio came out, and as some kind of effort to create OTT drama based on the fact that Eugenie wore a fabulous emerald tiara. That tiara worked so beautifully with Eugenie's dress (without a veil), and especially with Eugenie's hair color, eye color, etc.

As you said Empress Merel, two different weddings, two different brides, two different tiaras, and I don't buy that any drama was involved at all. If anything, Eugenie may have been inspired in some ways by M&H's wedding, but then she made her own individual and unique choices that suited her. The whole tabloid brouhaha is likely being made up completely, or else falsely fashioned together out of bits and pieces of overheard or imagined snippets of behind-the-scenes goings-on that actually do not involve any drama between the royals.

The real drama is taking place among the royal journos and tabloids (and perhaps a few disgruntled courtiers, or jealous periphery outsiders) who have nothing better to do. I guess they don't realize that Meghan is made of tough-stuff: Tungsten to be exact.
Reply With Quote
  #352  
Old 11-11-2018, 04:40 AM
muriel's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,559
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
The tiara story would have been more credible if the Times could have identified exactly which tiara Meghan had allegedly chosen to wear. As the story stands, it is difficult to think of an emerald and diamond set in the Queen's collection whose provenance would be doubtful.
The reality is, we have no idea as to what jewellery the Queen possesses. The Greville emerald and diamond tiara was rumoured to exist, but there was no real proof, and was first seen c75 years after it came into the possession of the RF. Not that I as suggesting the story is true, but there could well be another emerald and diamond tiara that we are unaware of.
Reply With Quote
  #353  
Old 11-11-2018, 05:10 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,735
seemsto me, that if no one believes the story is true, there is still a lot of discussion of it.
Reply With Quote
  #354  
Old 11-11-2018, 05:17 AM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,728
Yep, apparently that's the purpose of the fabrications: to get reactions and people discussing. And again, in the absence of seeing Meghan wearing another fabulous tiara, the tabloids seem to need to create drama about wedding tiaras. Nothing better to do, for all involved?
Reply With Quote
  #355  
Old 11-11-2018, 05:20 AM
muriel's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,559
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
seemsto me, that if no one believes the story is true, there is still a lot of discussion of it.
IMO, that is because these days, if anybody dare post anything other than a paean to Meghan, the floodgates of condemnation and disapproval are opened. The press, it seems, increasingly, has other ideas.
Reply With Quote
  #356  
Old 11-11-2018, 05:48 AM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,728
Seriously doubt that, since the tabs were on the warpath against Meghan from the very beginning. And this thread should be about Meghan's wedding tiara, not about whether paeans on her behalf are required, which they clearly are not.

Harry: "At the end of the day, Meghan chooses me, and I choose her. And therefore whatever we have to tackle individually or together, it will always be us together as a team... There's a hell of a lot that needs doing, but for us we'll make sure that our relationship is always put first..."
Reply With Quote
  #357  
Old 11-11-2018, 05:56 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel View Post
IMO, that is because these days, if anybody dare post anything other than a paean to Meghan, the floodgates of condemnation and disapproval are opened. The press, it seems, increasingly, has other ideas.
Not everyone is going to like her, the Press will write criticial stories and gushy stories, because that is the way Royal coverage works. Not everyone loves every Royal and so while she's had some good coverage, its inevitable that she will also get bad stories, because people who dislike the RF or her in particular will be bored by gushing praise type of stories... but if most people on this forum think she's wonderful why give any sort of credence to negative stories
Reply With Quote
  #358  
Old 11-11-2018, 06:37 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile View Post
Why do you say the story has credible sources and the majority here believe it? It seems like just the opposite to me.
True, if it is a "lame story" how can it have credible sources? and I certainly would not say that the majority on this forum believe it..
Reply With Quote
  #359  
Old 11-11-2018, 06:37 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 15,831
It’s not about who likes a royal or not. It’s about truth vs lie. Those who go to see the wedding display at Windsor will hear the truth from Meghan and Harry on the wonderful and exciting experience Meghan had in picking out her tiara.

Everything else is a tabloid lie that’s meant to stir up conversation.
__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
  #360  
Old 11-11-2018, 02:59 PM
Tilia C.'s Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: O, Germany
Posts: 5,549
Here's another reminder to stay on topic. A lengthy off-topic discussion has been removed. Please keep in mind that this thread is about Meghan's wedding tiara, not about journalism, her veil, or even other brides' veils.
__________________

__________________
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
#royalrelatives #royalgenes abdication althorp american history anastasia anastasia once upon a time belgian royal family castles chittagong cht clarence house crown princess victoria danish royalty denmark diana princess of wales dna dutch royal family edo emperor facts family tree foundation future genealogy hill historical drama house of glucksburg intro jacobite jewelry jumma king salman languages list of rulers lithuanian palaces mail maxima memoir monaco history mountbatten netflix nobel 2019 northern ireland norway norwegian royal family palestine popularity princess margaret random facts rown royal children royal dress-ups royal jewels royal marriage royal re-enactments. royal wedding royal wedding gown russian court dress russian imperial family saudi arabia settings snowdon spanish history spencer family state visit to denmark sweden swedish royalty tracts wittelsbach working royals; full-time royals; part-time royals;


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:30 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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