Duchess of Cornwall Jewellery 4: February-November 2007

[sirhon11234]

That Keppel tiara is nice and simple(which i love). But the tiara is too simple for camilla since the jewellery she wears now is a bit extravagant .

 

[jcbcode99]

I have seen that! The Keppel tiara is lovely, and very simple. Would it be worn like that Oriental inspired piece, the Westminster tiara that once held the Arcots and Hastings diamonds? It looks as if it would frame the face, rather than lie on the head. It is very pretty--I would like HRH in it, with some lovely drop earrings in the same red stone (since we know they're not real rubies--or so I've heard!).
Janet

 

[ayvee]

Camilla wore the Keppel ruby tiara as a necklace:
http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m319/ayvee/ayvee/Camilla-AsMrsP-BwearingMrsKeppelsRu.jpg

About the photo: This picture was scanned from a French magazine and was originally posted either at the Glittering Royal Events MB or Royal Jewels of the World MB. The original poster said that the photo was taken before Charles and Camilla got married and several years after the death of Diana, Princess of Wales.

Thought I would share it here.

Best wishes, Ayvee

 

[Thomas Parkman]

I could not agree with you ladies more. re this business of double standard, I must remind you that in those days women were not helpless little playthings either and had quite a few cards up their sleeves and knew well enough how to use them. Here in the South we still have what we call steel magnolias and they are formidable indeed. Where people got this idea of women as helpless little thirteen year old mongoloids is beyond me.

It is all a question of self respect. Women today look like sluts and men look like slobs, criminals and street bums. It is all this poverty mentality. This at the same time is the most negative time in the history of the human race. I cannot help but think of the wonderful saying: "How ugly we are becoming from being unable to think well of oursleves." It is quite obvious when you put on that kind of jewelry and that kind of class you have quite a different view of yourself and the world and it shows.

so give me glamour, beauty, elegance and outrageously beautiful jewels and well dressed and witty women whether they are all that beautiful or not-in their souls they are bearers of light.

PS would somebody please be so kind as to explain or show me what on earth the triple drop necklace or whatever is. I cannot pull up some of the links here. And now before Warren kicks me off the forum, cheers. Thomas Parkman

 

[Elspeth]

Try the link now, Thomas; I think I've fixed it (it's in post 10 of this thread).

 

[KelliB]

Did Camilla and the Queen Mother get along? Do you think the QM would be Okay with Camilla wearing so many of her pieces?

 

[BeatrixFan]

Based on the tales of Margaret Rhodes and several others including Countess Mountbatten of Burma who gave Gyles Brandreth frank interviews, the concensus was that the Queen Mother was happy for Charles and let him use the Castle of Mey to take Camilla away for weekends. Countess Mountbatten said in a TV programme aired on the wedding day, "The Queen Mother wasn't happy about the situation because she felt it hurt Charles, it hurt Camilla and it hurt Diana and her belief was that he should marry Camilla and make it all above board". Margaret Rhodes said that the Queen Mother met Camilla several times from the 70s and through to her death in 2002. Rhodes said that they got on very well so I don't think the Queen Mother would worry about her pieces being worn by Camilla and remember - she left those pieces to Charles for the use of his wife. The Queen Mother had a long time to change her will after 1992 if she didn't want them going to Camilla so I'd say we can safely believe that the Queen Mother wouldn't mind in the slightest.

 

[milla Ca]

That Keppel tiara is nice and simple(which i love). But the tiara is too simple for camilla since the jewellery she wears now is a bit extravagant .

We know that Camilla has a very special relationship to Alice Keppel, and i also think her jewels have a special value to the Duchess. Prince Charles bought many of the old pieces and gave it as a love gift to Camilla.
I don´t think that now the Duchess only will wear extravagant jewels like the necklace from the US trip. She also loves to wear older gifts and heirlooms.

 

[Skydragon]

We know that Camilla has a very special relationship to Alice Keppel, and i also think her jewels have a special value to the Duchess. Prince Charles bought many of the old pieces and gave it as a love gift to Camilla.

Most women value the jewels worn by their ancesters, as well as the gifts they receive and I wouldn't think Camilla is any different. I always thought how wonderful of Charles to find some of the missing pieces. I'm sure we will see, over the years old and new, large and small.

 

[jcbcode99]

Charles has been so villified and maligned for so long because of his devotion to Camilla, but I have always found it to show that he truly loves her and that she is the one, true love of his life. I think his heart must be beautiful to have searched for pieces that Camilla's family had to sell so he could return them to her. The Keppell piece is beautiful as a necklace and suits HRH beautifully--actually, has there been anything she has worn that didn't suit her? The only thing I can think of is that art deco emerald pin which she wore with the white suit (bad background choice, but a beautiful pin!). Camilla has a fantastic ability to pull off both impressive and simple pieces of jewellery. Not everyone has this ability.
Janet

 

[branchg]

Based on the tales of Margaret Rhodes and several others including Countess Mountbatten of Burma...

The Queen Mother left all of her jewels to The Queen in a tax-free transfer to avoid estate tax. She did not approve of Camilla and made it quite clear that she was opposed to Charles marrying her.

The Queen refused to consider the matter until after her mother's death because of her disapproval.

 

[BeatrixFan]

Evidence? Note that I gave sources for my facts.

 

[Elspeth]

So it was

I recall seeing Camilla wear the Keppel piece but they aren't real rubies are they?

Depends on what they are. If they're synthetically produced and have the same chemical composition as natural rubies, then they're real rubies (although not nearly as valuable as natural ones). But if they're some other red stone that just look like rubies, then they're not real ones. I assume it'd be the latter, because I don't think the technology to create synthetic ruby had been developed at the time this tiara/necklace was created.

 

[branchg]

Evidence? Note that I gave sources for my facts.

The Times noted the tax-free transfer of her property to The Queen. The issue of Camilla was revealed when the Countess of Wessex gave an unknowing interview to a journalist posing as a sheik. She was quoted as saying there was "no chance" of Charles and Camilla marrying while the "old lady" was still alive, aka The Queen Mother.

 

[Elspeth]

It seems as though different people have different opinions of the Queen Mother's attitude to a marriage between Charles and Camilla, because Margaret Rhodes, Countess Mountbatten, and the Countess of Wessex are all reliable sources. I suppose it's possible that the Queen Mother changed her mind over time or that it made a difference to her after Diana died.

 

[GillW]

Does anyone have a link to pictures of Camilla wearing the delicate gold bow brooch, which shows the initials on both of the blue end drops?
If I edit this enough times, maybe I'll get it right! - Apologies...

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r181/gillweb/xxcpbgoldribbonbowwithdrops-broochg.jpg


Thanks.

 

[jcbcode99]

Sorry, GillW, your link didn't work (I totally know how that goes). {ETA: it's working now - Elspeth} But, I have seen pictures of the brooch and I think it is just beautiful! It is so elegant, just like Camilla. She is really lucky to have all these gems at her disposal!
Janet

 

[xtan]

yes, she is really lucky to have all those wonderful gems at her disposal. no wonder she never let go of charles at all....

 

[BeatrixFan]

Yes, I'm sure she waited 30 odd years just to wear a tiara or two.

 

[Warren]

Yes, I'm sure she waited 30 odd years just to wear a tiara or two.

Not forgetting that she has access to a very nice one belonging to her own family...

 

[Skydragon]

yes, she is really lucky to have all those wonderful gems at her disposal. no wonder she never let go of charles at all....

Is that what she was waiting 30+ years for, silly me....

 

[jcbcode99]

Not to ignore the Durbar and the Boucheron, but I think that the emerald drop earrings and the brooch Mrs. Greville left the Queen Mother were worth the wait alone.

 

[jcbcode99]

I also love seeing the jewellery as it was worn then, and then seeing it cross generations to new members of the family. I think doing so makes a subtle statement about longevity.

 

[Thomas Parkman]

But My God the Hats, maybe we should start a Worst Hats Thread. I would have a field day. Please do not misunderstand. I love hats. I like men to wear hats, I like women to wear hats. The loss of hat wearing in my humble opinion comes only just below women wearing pant suits and pants. an absolutely awful abomination.

But the hats Camilla wears look as if they were designed by somebody strung out on huffing Go, smoked up on weed or some other brain killing illlegal drug. Not all of them you understand. I just think the Brits have the wackiest ways with those contraptions. and that has not been confined to Camilla either. Now let me get out of here before Warren and the members come after me to skin me alive. Cheers.

 

[Skydragon]

Thomas, Thomas, hats are a very individual thing and each hat must be chosen, by the man or woman for the occasion. A couple of her hats were not what I would wear, but they still looked good on Camilla! I expect some of my hats would not be worn by Camilla, but you go too far when complaining about trousers and trouser suits on women!!!

 

[Elspeth]

Thomas, here's the thread - complain away!

 

[Jed Cecil]

This is just to clear up what I see as a continuing thread of semi-confusion regarding the wonderful diadem made by Garrard in 1911 for the Delhi Durbar and worn by Queen-Empress Mary on that occasion.

Yes, 5 of the Cambridge Emeralds were inverted, as it were, and stood upright at the top. And the Cullinans III and IV were set centrally. I, too, would prefer the jewel restored with these gems, but HM The Queen uses the Cambridge Emeralds interchangeably with the fantastic pearls in the Grand Duchess Vladimir Tiara. And the Cullinans III and IV have been used for many decades now joined as a brooch and HM wears it often.

Even going back into the 18th Century, there are many precedents, especially in jewels made by the major houses for Royal Families, in designing the jewels so that they were adaptable for many purposes. Many of the pieces which Prince Albert designed for Queen Victoria were able to come apart as various other jewels and be worn separately. Queen Mary originally designed the Lover's Knot Tiara with upstanding pearls completely around the jewel --- the pearls had been a wedding gift. But she wore it many times both ways, according to the photographic evidence. Once, and I forget to what occasion or ceremony (it may have been to the wedding of Wilhelm II's daughter in 1913), Queen Mary even had the Cullinan's I and II taken out of the Scepter and Imperial State Crown, respectively, and wore THEM pinned to her bodice as a brooch, with Cullinan's III and IV also worn on the same occasion! Dear Queen Mary, sadly we'll never see another like her.

Sorry to be so long-winded, but the subject fascinates me and the questions posed in this forum are so interesting! The Crown Jewels of the United Kingdom are a collection that has been formed relatively recently, but the jewelery that forms the private collection of HM The Queen is so vast that it may be hard to imagine. There are jewels we have never heard of, gifts given by the Lords of India and the Empire to Edward VII, George V, Edward VIII and George VI during the world tours taken when they were variously Dukes of York and Princes of Wales. Who knows what unimaginable treasures were brought back --- and all private property. Queen Alexandra's collection was stupendous and we know much of it was given to her grandson, the late Duke of Windsor.

Another spectacular collection of jewelry is used by the Swedish Royal Family and primarily owned by The Bernadotte Foundation, including the fabulous Leuchtenburg Sapphire Parure and SO much else.

But if I could go back in time and see any one collection of jewels, it would be the treasures of the Youssupovs. The legendary photograph of the cache found in the safe that had been bricked up in the Youssupov palace, and found several years after the revolution, makes my mouth water! The mounds of loose stones and marvelous treasure are so amazing! Also, I suppose I wouldn't say no to walking through the Grand Duchess Vladimir's bedroom with a glass of champagne, and seeing all HER fabulousness! Sigh. Those were the days...

 

[branchg]

Alexandra's jewels were divided among her children after her death by George V and Queen Mary. The myth of The Duke possessing any jewels belonging to the Royal Collection has been debunked many times, including a statement issued in 1974 by Buckingham Palace.

The Duke did possess a number of valuable emeralds, rubies, diamonds and sapphires that he was given over the years during his tours of India as Prince of Wales. Many of these gems were later reset by Cartier and Van Cleef & Arpel in Paris into spectacular jewels for The Duchess.

 

[Adamari]

New earrings?

Camilla appears to have received a stunning pair of diamond earrings in Kuwait. At least, I've never seen them before.

 

[BeatrixFan]

The earrings are not new. She wore them in the USA on her first trip.