Duchess of Cornwall Jewels 8: January 2016 -


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
The chocked thing could be a smart move on her part. QE2 was never interested in them, and I'm sure QM stock pile is still in the vault.
 
padams2359 said:
The chocked thing could be a smart move on her part. QE2 was never interested in them, and I'm sure QM stock pile is still in the vault.
Click to expand...

It was my understanding that all the chokers of the Duchess are her personal property and not from the royal collection.
 
Yes indeed, they are her personal property, either inherited of gifts from her Prince.
As such they will not be joining 'the Royal Collection'.
 
Just remember that there is a choice with her personal jewelry. She can leave it to family and friends, subject to tax. Or she can give it to the royal trust, which is an untaxed move. Or do some of each, as I think she will.
Doubtless many family and friends will receive bequests - but wisely so as to not tax the income of recipients. I've always thought Camilla to be practical in these kinds of things.
And I also think some of her own iconic pieces, if not anyone's choice, will go to the royal collection. At some point, Camilla will be as fondly represented in royal exhibits as other past royals. And her personal jewelry choices will be a part of that tale.
 
AdmirerUS said:
Just remember that there is a choice with her personal jewelry. She can leave it to family and friends, subject to tax. Or she can give it to the royal trust, which is an untaxed move. Or do some of each, as I think she will.

Doubtless many family and friends will receive bequests - but wisely so as to not tax the income of recipients. I've always thought Camilla to be practical in these kinds of things.

And I also think some of her own iconic pieces, if not anyone's choice, will go to the royal collection. At some point, Camilla will be as fondly represented in royal exhibits as other past royals. And her personal jewelry choices will be a part of that tale.
Click to expand...



This is such an interesting topic for discussion- I've been contemplating the Greville Jewels that Camilla has been wearing - they actually have more of a connection her than the Queen Mother, as the original owner the Hon. Dame Margaret Greville was in fact godmother to Sonia Cubitt, Camilla's grandmother, who inherited Mrs Greville's cultured pearls !
 
AdmirerUS said:
Just remember that there is a choice with her personal jewelry. She can leave it to family and friends, subject to tax. Or she can give it to the royal trust, which is an untaxed move. Or do some of each, as I think she will.
Doubtless many family and friends will receive bequests - but wisely so as to not tax the income of recipients. I've always thought Camilla to be practical in these kinds of things.
Click to expand...



I don't believe Camilla had much jewelry when she married Charles.
He gave her most of what she has.
I remember reading that he had scouts in the major auction houses because he wanted to find some nice pieces for her.

(If that is the case, it seems like they should stay in the RF, rather than be bequeathed to other people). Although if they were a gift, that might change things.
 
Mirabel said:
I don't believe Camilla had much jewelry when she married Charles.
He gave her most of what she has.
I remember reading that he had scouts in the major auction houses because he wanted to find some nice pieces for her.

(If that is the case, it seems like they should stay in the RF, rather than be bequeathed to other people). Although if they were a gift, that might change things.
Click to expand...


My opinion is that , when something is given to someone as a personal gift, then it belongs to the person who received it and he/she is free to sell it or leave it to whoever he/she wants. A case in point is Sarah's wedding tiara, which was given to her and, therefore, she didn't have to return it to the Queen after she divorced Andrew.

My personal position , on the other hand, which isn't always the case in the real world, is that royal jewelry, especially grand tiaras that were used by former queen consorts or reigning queens, should stay mostly in the main line of the family, either by being inherited by the next king or queen, or, as I prefer it, by being placed in a family trust/foundation as the Bernadottes and the Orange-Nassaus have done. None of Charles' gifts to Camilla fall into the latter category though IMHO.
 
Duc_et_Pair said:
It was my understanding that all the chokers of the Duchess are her personal property and not from the royal collection.
Click to expand...



Oh yes, those are hers. Everyone compares a person to the one who wore the jewels before. As in Diana's ring on DoC. OM's chokers have not seen the light of day in 70 years. No one wears them. I think it would be great for Camilla to start wearing them as consort. She is also taller then QE, so the stomachers would probable look really good on a dress with something higher on the neck.
 
Mirabel said:
I don't believe Camilla had much jewelry when she married Charles.
He gave her most of what she has.
I remember reading that he had scouts in the major auction houses because he wanted to find some nice pieces for her.

(If that is the case, it seems like they should stay in the RF, rather than be bequeathed to other people). Although if they were a gift, that might change things.
Click to expand...
The floral tiara, the turquoise demi-parure, the diamond snake necklace, aquamarine and diamond suite, the diamond demi-parure, the aquamarine and pearl choker, amethyst and pearl choker, small diamond and pearl choker, garnet and pearl choker, a single strand of pearls and her everyday pearl earrings, and of course, her engagement ring.

I am sure that is not her entire collection pre-wedding, I've missed the brooches and modern bits and bobs. Not an insignificant collection to bring to her marriage.
 
Just a question. Over many, many years the royals have received vast amount of jewelry from many Arab countries. Do these countries, or say, their monarchs receive the standard picture of the Queen in a silver frame? Or is there something more?
 
padams2359 said:
Just a question. Over many, many years the royals have received vast amount of jewelry from many Arab countries. Do these countries, or say, their monarchs receive the standard picture of the Queen in a silver frame? Or is there something more?
Click to expand...

It's an intriguing question. I don't think the BRF gifts for a gift. I think they gift on inbound State Visits. And yes, there is a photo of the Queen given when she is on outbound trips. I don't think we have ever heard what the POW does (if anything) on the visits.

I have always thought that the BRF approach to this is to show there is NO quid pro quo for official visits. As in you can give us an expensive piece of jewelry and we will respond with impeccable manners to show you we deeply appreciate the gesture. And cannot be bought.

Because that's the rub. The Saudis (IMO and without getting political here folks) overdo the gifting thing. It looks like they just may be trying to curry favor. For all we know, they just have piles of money and are looking for easy ways to get rid of it. And to adorn the spouse of the future Queen in a time when the BRF itself is not buying huge parures is also a really nice gesture. If you are just trying to spend more money than you can possibly spend. And I am happy for Camilla and I love the gems.

But I don't think the Saudis disclose incoming gifts. And I think the BRF does not disclose outgoing gifting down to a line item. We know about it from press coverage and press releases. But again, the Saudis IMO are not looking for for gifts in return. They are looking for something else.
 
I think the Queen usually gives a framed photo of her and Philip and a gift for the Head of State and one for their spouse. I know a few of these have been copies of letters, documents etc from The Royal Collection which would mean they weren't expensive per se.
 
The legendary Middle Eastern gifts are exactly what they seem. From a culture that gifts, they give and those gifts are commensurate with what you would expect.

Just take a look at the personal jewellery their own princesses wear, they would never give something less to a noted guest. They are also perfectly aware that while these jewels are gifted to a specific person, Camilla, Catherine, etc. they become state property.

My question is if a friend from the middle east gifts Charles a pair of diamond studded cuff links for his birthday, or a fabulous horse to HM to for her birthday, do they get to keep them?
 
You said it better than I did. And just to kvetch, under the old UK Royal website, I could have found the policy about this in 3 clicks. Now I cannot find it at all. Its a rabbits' warren of a site and it bugs me no end.

I can tell you that they formally report gifts from state visits. But there is no reporting (transparency) on other gifting. As I recall the policy, I cannot remember if it covers all gifting or just foreign visit gifting. I do remember a paragraph about personal gifts being allowed.

My guess is that they promote meaningful gifting, rather than high value gifting. And that when in doubt, it goes to the royal collection. Because they have been bitten by the fiscal issue too many times.
 
MARG said:
My question is if a friend from the middle east gifts Charles a pair of diamond studded cuff links for his birthday, or a fabulous horse to HM to for her birthday, do they get to keep them?
Click to expand...

Royals can receive private gifts from their friends. These gifts are their own property. But they need to pay gift taxes.
All gifts received during official trips (including from friends) are official.
 
The official policy was released in 2003 (https://www.royal.uk/sites/default/files/media-packs/gifts_policy_2003.pdf) and states

Gifts are classed as personal when they are:
-given by people whom the Member of The Royal Family knows privately and not during or in connection with an official engagement or duty;
-given by public bodies, businesses or private individuals with whom the Member of The Royal Family has an established relationship, such as Warrant Holders, on the occasion of a marriage, birth, birthday or other notable personal occasion (including Christmas), and where the value of the gift is less than £150 (if a gift is given where there is no established
relationship, other than on a notable personal occasion or is over £150 in value, the gift should be classified as official);
-prizes won as a result of personal activity; or given on other occasions, for example by staff, where there is no connection to official
duties.

I think this means they can receive gifts from royals they know or have met before for a birthday and keep it as personal.

That being said wouldn't it be better if any excessively big jewels, as the Middle East royals like to give, were counted as official as that way Camilla gets to use them without paying tax on them or her descendants paying inheritance tax on them.
 
I prefer the 3 strand to the full 5 as its a bit overpowering ,none the less a stunning set!
 
The necklace is impressive, but it's better if Camilla use 1 or 2 strands of the necklace rather than all 5 of the strands. It's too overpowering for her neckline. It takes a strong neckline to carry all 5 strands off.
 
Dman said:
The necklace is impressive, but it's better if Camilla use 1 or 2 strands of the necklace rather than all 5 of the strands. It's too overpowering for her neckline. It takes a strong neckline to carry all 5 strands off.
Click to expand...

MY personal preference would be to see Camilla use the smaller, 3 string necklace for occasions of state. She has really stopped wearing much jewelery in the last 8-9 years, other than the obligatory tiara when required.
 
Last edited:
muriel said:
MY personal preference would be to see Camilla use the smaller, 3 string necklace for occasions of state. She has really stopped wearing much jewelery in the last 8-9 years, other than the obligatory tiara when required.
Click to expand...

3 strands would be nice too. Wearing all 5 is just too much for her kind of neckline.
 
There is something about wearing all 5 strands of this necklace that just screams "majestic". Its perfect for Camilla too with being in her 70s, the neck and chest skin just ain't what it used to be and this necklace detracts from that.

The 5 strand is perfect for a majestic occasion such as a coronation or such but for a white tie dinner with a tiara, perhaps a 3 strand would do the trick.

It certainly is an impressive piece.
 
Osipi said:
There is something about wearing all 5 strands of this necklace that just screams "majestic". Its perfect for Camilla too with being in her 70s, the neck and chest skin just ain't what it used to be and this necklace detracts from that.

The 5 strand is perfect for a majestic occasion such as a coronation or such but for a white tie dinner with a tiara, perhaps a 3 strand would do the trick.

It certainly is an impressive piece.
Click to expand...

The necklace is very majestic indeed. A strong and young neckline is needed carry it off. Thats not Camilla's neckline though. It's better for her to use 2 or 3 strands.

Even The Queen has adjusted some of her necklaces due to her aging neckline.
 
Dman said:
The necklace is very majestic indeed. A strong and young neckline is needed carry it off. Thats not Camilla's neckline though. It's better for her to use 2 or 3 strands.

Even The Queen has adjusted some of her necklaces due to her aging neckline.
Click to expand...

While I take your broader point about a younger neckline for such a heavy necklace when all 5 string are used, necklaces of this type also require a certain presence and attitude that often, younger women do not possess. I believe Camilla does do the 5 string justice, much as i would like to see her in the 3 string version.
 
muriel said:
While I take your broader point about a younger neckline for such a heavy necklace when all 5 string are used, necklaces of this type also require a certain presence and attitude that often, younger women do not possess. I believe Camilla does do the 5 string justice, much as i would like to see her in the 3 string version.
Click to expand...

I agree, but that was The Queen Mother, imo.

I think Catherine, Princess Mary or Queen Maxima can pull it off.
 
Last edited:
Dman said:
I agree, but that was The Queen Mother, imo.

I think Catherine, Princess Mary or Queen Maxima can pull it off.
Click to expand...

Catherine is a bit schlouching and has a frêle appearance. I am not sure the huge 5-strand necklace is something for her, but who knows.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Marengo
Jordanian Royal Jewels 2: Jan 2024 -
Replies
0
Views
602
Marengo
Marengo
Marengo
Queen Camilla Jewels 2: February 2024 -
2
Replies
41
Views
4K
muriel
muriel
Tilia C.
Queen Silvia Jewels 4: Jun 2023 -
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
LadyFinn
LadyFinn
Stefan
Jewels of the British Nobility 2: Aug. 2023 -
Replies
11
Views
1K
The Royal Watcher
T
Stefan
Crown Princess Victoria Jewels 4: Jun 2023 -
2 3
Replies
85
Views
7K
Opals
O

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom