Pranter
Imperial Majesty
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2011
- Messages
- 12,309
- City
- Midwest
- Country
- United States
I don't think Kate or Camilla are locked into any tiara due to their husband's views on the women who wore the tiaras.
LaRae
LaRae
I agree, I suspect Eugenie, who is 100% based in the UK, will be called upon to attend State dinners in the future. She has lovely manners and is the granddaughter of the Queen, who better to attend when the current generation of the Queen’s cousins are no longer able to do so? Thus, she’ll need access to a tiara.Would lifetime loans be an option? I like the idea of any HRH/princess having her own tiara, however, preferably without the risk of it being sold at some point. I wouldn't be surprised if at some point (when the current cousins no longer attend) both Eugenie and Beatrice will be asked to join the family for banquets - just like prince and princess Michael of Kent are somewhat 'semi-active' royals; where a tiara would be expected of a royal princess.
So, for born princesses that could be managed by a lifetime loan and for princesses by marriage it would be available to (only) them as long as they are married (or unmarried widow).
Yes, and her heir will inherit them tax-free. The other senior royals own nothing of importance because of inheritance issues.
Right-they are owned by The Queen, not Elizabeth and will be inherited by The King, not Charles.
I don't think Kate or Camilla are locked into any tiara due to their husband's views on the women who wore the tiaras.
LaRae
Eugenie *might* wear a tiara once a year if that. No reason really to lifetime loan or give it to her. Her children won't be titled at this point...they will have very little need for it and may end up having to sell it off to pay for taxes etc.
Must better to leave it in the BRF vaults for her (or others) to use as needed.
LaRae
Prince Charles does not even own his suits, or the cars he regularly drives in. .
They do not 'own' in a conventional sense the properties associated with the duchies. As such Charles doesn't own Highgrove - he leases it from the Duchy of Cornwall with the income from the Duchy as he used Duchy capital to buy it. When he becomes King Highgrove will pass to William and Charles will have to negotiate with William if he wants to continue to lease it.
I think the Emerald Kokoshnik is a wonderful addition to the available jewellery. Someone earlier mentioned that Charles and William were responsible for the fact that Camilla uses the Diamond Bucheron and Cambridge Lovers Knot respectively. I do not believe so. Camilla has also used the Delhi Durbar and regularly uses her own family tiara. I believe that the fact we have only seen the Delhi Durbar once is because it is a lot heavier to wear than the Bucheron and her own one.To be honest - I don't understand the discussion about wether she should or should not have gotten the tiara as a gift because
a) she's not likely to have a lot of occasions to wear it or
b) ladies of the main line should wear it.
Fact is: the tiara obviously HASN'T been worn by any other member of the royal family in a long time.
Does it really matter, where it's "stored"? If any other female royal wanted to wear it, they could have done it, for sure. But to me it seems as if they didn't want, so where is the problem?
If someone starts to wear it now, then imo the only reason it because it looked perfect on Eugenie - and someone wants to get the same applaus.
Yes, and her heir will inherit them tax-free. The other senior royals own nothing of importance because of inheritance issues.
I wonder who picks the tiara in such a case; i have a mental image of HM and Eugenie (and a few months earlier Meghan) going through all the jewelry and trying stuff on, but that is probably not how it happens
In my head it's "Say yes to the dress" but with tiaras
What do you suppose comes first, the choice of tiara or the choice of dress design?
Eugenie says she knew her designer immediately, and yet her dress and her bridal party's sashes almost seemed built around that emerald tiara.
I can also imagine that the Queen's granddaughters have known the content of granny's vault all their lives. They are family after all, and little kids love to look at all these sparkly things. Who knows, but maybe Eugenie had started adoring the tiara while she still was a little kid, begging great-granny to let her have a look at it. And don't grannies and great-grannies like to spoil the little ones from time to time, and let them (carefully) try on their sparkly things? Also families talk about all kinds of things over a cup of tea or when having family dinners. With the recent weddings of her cousins, family conversations might have touched on weddings tiaras from time to time. I imagine that the girls have chatted about which ones they'd prefer. Somehow I don't think that Eugenie had to wait till her engagement to learn about this particular tiara.
That is the first I hear how Charles does not own Highgrove, his cars (apart from leasing them probably) and his suits.Charles is the Duke of Cornwall, he owns the Duchy as long as he is not king and can of course use the income (and even the complete capital) how he sees fit. So if he buys clothes off the income of the Duchy, they are of course his private possessions - it's not like he has to give them all to William once he becomes king as part of William's inheritance. He has bought privately a lot of jewels to give to Camilla and Camilla will be able to give them to her own children in her will, if she so chose. Same with the Duchy of Lancaster and the queen.
What do you suppose comes first, the choice of tiara or the choice of dress design?
Eugenie says she knew her designer immediately, and yet her dress and her bridal party's sashes almost seemed built around that emerald tiara.
Jewelry yes, re tiaras, my observation is that BRF women are given access to only one tiara from the vault at a time. While they are allowed to switch / upgrade, they cannot wear vault tiaras interchangeably. I have brought this up before and been disagreed with but no one has yet to provide an example of either Sophie, Camilla or Kate wearing a vault tiara, then wearing another tiara from the vault and then wearing the previous tiara after the switch.Agreed. Both ladies probably have access to more jewellery if they so required.
I don't think Kate or Camilla are locked into any tiara due to their husband's views on the women who wore the tiaras.
LaRae
Before Charles married Diana, he petitioned the Duchy of Cornwall to buy Highgrove for his use. It was purchased for him. It is still a Duchy property. In an accounting of his expenses and cost a few years back, it was revealed that the only car he owns is that 1969 Aston Martin he got for his birthday from HM and the DoE. Like HM, clothing that he wears on official business is not paid for privately. In Charles's case, either The Prince's Trust or The Duchy of Cornwall pay. His homes are furnished with things that belong to The Crown. As to be expected.
I'm not voicing a negative opinion about this, just posting what I know to be true.
The watercolor painting on the front of the wedding program is the same as the sashes.
Before Charles married Diana, he petitioned the Duchy of Cornwall to buy Highgrove for his use. It was purchased for him. It is still a Duchy property. In an accounting of his expenses and cost a few years back, it was revealed that the only car he owns is that 1969 Aston Martin he got for his birthday from HM and the DoE. Like HM, clothing that he wears on official business is not paid for privately. In Charles's case, either The Prince's Trust or The Duchy of Cornwall pay. His homes are furnished with things that belong to The Crown. As to be expected.
I'm not voicing a negative opinion about this, just posting what I know to be true.
Jewelry yes, re tiaras, my observation is that BRF women are given access to only one tiara from the vault at a time. While they are allowed to switch / upgrade, they cannot wear vault tiaras interchangeably. I have brought this up before and been disagreed with but no one has yet to provide an example of either Sophie, Camilla or Kate wearing a vault tiara, then wearing another tiara from the vault and then wearing the previous tiara after the switch.
The reason I say locked in is that now that Camilla wears the Greville Boucheron Tiara, which was a favorite of Charles' beloved grandmother, and Kate now wears the Lover's Knot Tiara which was Diana's tiara from the vaults. IMO they are not going to switch, not because the Queen won't allow it, rather because of their husbands (Charles and William) great affection for the previous wearers (Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother and Diana, Princess of Wales respectively).
So to bring this back to Eugenie's wedding tiara, while lovely, that tiara is not going to be used by Camilla, Catherine or anyone else during this current monarch's reign because this monarch does not allow royal women to switch back and forth between tiaras and I doubt if any of the "mainline" will want their assigned tiara to be one with such a strong colored stone.
Yes both are taken from a water color of an American artist the couple both like.
https://ca.hellomagazine.com/royalty/02018101247864/princess-eugenie-bridal-party-outfits-gift-bags
The princes trust has nothing to do with his clothes. It is a charity and raises money for his causes.
Cornwall is his source of income. It pays for all his expenses, like the income from Lancaster pays for the queen.
Serena Stanhope wore the Lotus tiara for her wedding, then a few years later it showed up on Catherine.
I don't think there are hard and fast rules with loaned tiaras. I think much of it has to do with comfort. I also think that Camilla and Kate have perhaps more leeway than others in choosing one of HM's tiaras for an event.
Somehow I don't think that Eugenie had to wait till her engagement to learn about this particular tiara.