Kate Middleton’s jewelry loans from Queen Elizabeth

Kate Middleton’s jewelry loans from Queen Elizabeth

Someone asked me last year how many pieces of Queen Elizabeth‘s jewelry Kate Middleton has borrowed since marrying into the British Royal Family, because the thought is that HM doesn’t want to loan Kate a bunch of royal jewelry. Since KP announced a return trip to Canada for the Cambridges I’ve been wondering whether we will see any royal jewelry on Kate this time – she wore royal pieces on her previous trip to Canada and on her trip to New Zealand, but didn’t on her trip to India when many people thought she would. So with that in mind, I thought I’d do a post about all of the jewelry the Queen has loaned Kate.

So far, HM has loaned Kate: 3 tiaras, 2 brooches, 2 sets of earrings, 1 necklace, and 2 bracelets.


Cartier Halo Tiara

Cartier Halo Tiara
[The Royal Collection]

The Halo Tiara was made by Cartier in 1936 and was purchased by the then Duke of York (future King George VI) for the then Duchess of York (future Queen Elizabeth/Queen Mother). The tiara is made of 16 graduated scrolls set with 739 brilliants and 149 baton diamonds.

The Queen Mother only wore it once, prior to becoming Queen Consort, before upgrading to other pieces. In 1944, as an 18th birthday gift, she gave the tiara to then Princess Elizabeth – who has never worn it publicly. HM lent the tiara to both Princess Margaret and Princess Anne. They both ditched it as soon as their tiara collections grew, so it was available for loan when Kate got married in 2011.

In keeping with the tradition for this piece, Kate also ditched it as soon as possible (though Kate was kind of forced to since this tiara was on loan to a Cartier display in France when Kate’s second tiara appearance came around).

Previous Wearings:

  1. April 29, 2011 – Wedding

Lotus Flower Tiara

Lotus Flower Tiara
[The Royal Collection]

The Lotus Flower Tiara is another piece which originated with the Queen Mother. In 1923, the then Duchess of York received a diamond and pearl necklace in a meander design made by Garrard as a wedding gift from her husband, the then Duke of York. Six months later, she had Garrard dismantle the necklace and use the diamonds and pearls to create this tiara. In keeping with the time period, Elizabeth wore the tiara in a bandeau style across her forehead.

Though this tiara was a staple in her early years, Elizabeth stopped wearing it as she gained access to more impressive tiaras, so in 1959 she gifted the tiara to her daughter, Princess Margaret, prior to her wedding to Antony Armstrong-Jones. Margaret wore the tiara in traditional tiara fashion on top of her head. In 1993, Margaret lent the tiara to her new daughter-in-law, Serena Stanhope, for her wedding to Margaret’s son, Viscount Linley.

The ownership of this tiara was in question by royal watchers after Margaret died in 2002 – with people assuming it belonged to one of Margaret’s children – but in 2013 the tiara popped up on Kate when she attended her first diplomatic reception. She wore it again for her first State Banquet in 2015.

Previous Wearings:

  1. December 3, 2013 – Diplomatic Reception
  2. October 20, 2015 – State Banquet for China

Cambridge Lover’s Knot Tiara

Cambridge Lover's Knot Tiara
[The Royal Collection]

In 1913, Queen Mary asked Garrard to make a copy of a 200-year-old Gothic Revival tiara owned by her grandmother, Princess Augusta of Hesse-Cassel, Duchess of Cambridge. Mary dismantled the Ladies of England Tiara to use the diamonds and pearls to create the replica. The Lover’s Knot Tiara consists of 19 diamond arches in the shape of lover’s knot bows with 19 baroque pearl pendants dangling from each arch. The tiara originally featured another 19 upright pearl spikes, but those were removed.

When Mary died in 1953, she left the tiara to Queen Elizabeth II, who wore it during the early years of her reign. In 1981, the Queen loaned the tiara to the new Princess of Wales, who wore it throughout her marriage (this was the only tiara HM loaned to Diana, though Diana also wore her family Spencer Tiara for her wedding and throughout her marriage). After Diana’s death, the tiara was returned to the Queen.

The Lover’s Knot Tiara reappeared after more than 25 years when Kate wore it to the diplomatic reception in 2015. While the tiara’s base had a wrapping of blonde velvet in Diana’s day, the velvet is now brown to match Kate’s hair color, which means we’ll probably see this one on Kate again.

Kate and William diplomatic reception 2015

Previous Wearings:

  1. December 8, 2015 – Diplomatic Reception
  2. December 8, 2016 – Diplomatic Reception


Maple Leaf Brooch

Maple Leaf Brooch
[The Royal Collection]

This diamond maple leaf brooch was a gift to Queen Elizabeth (the future Queen Mother) from her husband, King George VI, ahead of their tour of Canada in 1939. In 1951, she lent the brooch to then Princess Elizabeth for her first visit to Canada. When the Queen Mother died in 2002, she left the brooch (along with the rest of her jewelry) to the current Queen. Since then, the brooch has been worn by the Queen, Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, and Kate, Duchess of Cambridge for their visits to Canada.

Camilla only wore it for her first visit to Canada in 2009, and not on her second visit in 2012. Sophie, who has visited Canada multiple times, has not worn it. I doubt Kate will wear this brooch during her second trip to Canada since Camilla didn’t wear it for her second trip.

Previous Wearings:

  1. July 1, 2011 – Canada (Canada Day Citizenship Ceremony, Evening Show Celebrations)
  2. July 9, 2011 – Canada (reception at Calgary Zoo)
  3. September 24, 2016 – Canada (Arrival and Official Welcome)
  4. September 26, 2016 – Canada (Government House reception)
  5. October 1, 2016 – Canada (Departure)

New Zealand Fern Brooch

New Zealand Fern Brooch
[The Royal Collection]

This diamond and platinum brooch was a Christmas gift to the Queen from the Women of Auckland during the Commonwealth Tour of 1953-4. It is in the shape of a silver fern which is a plant specific to New Zealand and has been adopted as a national symbol of the country.

The Queen has worn it on several occasions throughout her reign for New Zealand-related events. She loaned it to Kate in 2014 for her tour of New Zealand. That was the first time HM has loaned out this brooch – Camilla, who has visited New Zealand a couple times, has never worn it.

Previous Wearings:

  1. April 7, 2014 – Arrival in New Zealand
  2. April 13, 2014 – Church in New Zealand


Diamond Chandelier Earrings

These chandelier earrings feature a bezel-set diamond supporting three fringes of round and baguette diamonds – the middle fringe ends with a pear-shaped diamond, while the two outer fringes end in a diamond crescent with three more fringes of a baguette diamond and a bezel-set round diamond.

These earrings are on loan from HM, and Kate has worn them six times since 2011.

Queen's Diamond Chandelier Earrings on Kate Middleton

Previous Wearings:

  1. July 9, 2011 – BAFTA gala, USA
  2. December 3, 2013 – Diplomatic Reception
  3. October 20, 2015 – State Banquet for China
  4. December 8, 2015 – Diplomatic Reception
  5. May 15, 2016 – Royal Windsor Horse Show
  6. June 22, 2016 – EACH gala dinner
  7. March 17, 2017 – Day 1 in Paris

Queen Mother’s Sapphire and Diamond Fringe Earrings

These sapphire and diamond earrings belonged to the Queen Mother, though she rarely wore them. They feature a sapphire surrounded by diamonds with a diamond fringe on the bottom. The Queen has never worn them publicly, though she presumably inherited them in 2002 when the Queen Mother died, and instead lent them to Kate for the 100 Women in Hedge Funds gala in 2015.

Previous Wearings:

  1. October 27, 2015 – 100 Women in Hedge Funds gala

Queen Elizabeth’s Diamond Stud and Pearl Drop Earrings

These earrings, featuring a diamond stud with a pearl drop, were first worn by Queen Elizabeth during her Silver Jubilee in 1977. They were then loaned to Sophie, Countess of Wessex for the wedding of Prince Guillaume and Princess Stephanie of Luxembourg in 2012. Kate wore them for the first time during her second tour of Canada on September 25, 2016.

Previous Wearings:

  1. September 25, 2016 – Canada Tour 2016 Day 2
  2. October 11, 2016 – Netherlands visit
  3. November 28, 2016 – Memorial service for 6th Duke of Westminster
  4. December 25, 2016 – Christmas church in Bucklebury
  5. April 5, 2016 – Service of Hope
  6. April 16, 2017 – Easter service at Windsor Castle

Queen Elizabeth’s Bahrain Pearl Drop Earrings


Queen Elizabeth’s Bahrain Pearl Drop Earrings were made from two pearls (among a gift of seven) which were a wedding gift to HM from the Sheikh of Bahrain in 1947. One large round, four small round, and three baguette diamonds accompany the pearl in each earring.

The Queen wore these mainly in her early years as monarch although she wore them as recently as the 2015 Festival of Remembrance. She loaned these earrings to The Countess of Wessex in October 2012, and to The Duchess of Cambridge for the 2016 Remembrance Sunday.

Previous Wearings:

  1. November 13, 2016 – Remembrance Sunday
  2. June 20, 2017 – Royal Ascot Day 1

Queen Elizabeth’s Diamond Pendant Earrings

The Diamond Pendant Earrings were first worn publicly by Queen Elizabeth at the 2012 State Opening of Parliament, however their provenance is not yet known.

The Queen loaned these earrings to Kate for the November 23rd Place2Be Wellbeing in Schools Awards.

Previous Wearings:

  1. November 23, 2016 – Place2Be Wellbeing in Schools Awards
  2. December 8, 2016 – Diplomatic Reception
  3. June 17, 2017 – Trooping the Color


Nizam of Hyderabad Diamond Necklace

Nizam Necklace
[The Royal Collection]

This diamond necklace was made by Cartier in the 1930s and was a wedding gift from the last Nizam of Hyderabad, Mr. Osman Ali Khan, to then Princess Elizabeth for her 1947 wedding to Prince Philip. Elizabeth was allowed to choose her own pieces from the jeweler as the wedding gifts, and she chose this necklace and a floral tiara (which has now been dismantled to make the Burmese Ruby Tiara and three rose brooches) from Cartier.

The Queen has worn the necklace multiple times throughout her reign, including in several portraits. She loaned the necklace to Kate for the National Portrait Gallery gala in 2014.

Previous Wearings:

  1. February 11, 2014 – National Portrait Gallery gala


Queen Elizabeth’s Wedding Gift Bracelet

Diamond wedding bracelet
[The Royal Collection]

In 1947, Prince Philip dismantled a tiara that belonged to his mother, Princess Andrew of Greece and Denmark, to make then Princess Elizabeth’s diamond engagement ring and this diamond bracelet which he gave to her as a wedding gift. The bracelet features a repeated geometric pattern centered around three large diamonds.

The Queen has worn the bracelet throughout her reign, including in her 2012 Diamond Jubilee portraits. Shockingly, given that it was a wedding gift from her husband, the Queen loaned the bracelet to Kate for her first State Banquet in 2015 and again for the diplomatic reception in 2015.

Previous Wearings:

  1. October 20, 2015 – State Banquet for China
  2. December 8, 2015 – Diplomatic Reception
  3. December 8, 2016 – Diplomatic Reception
  4. February 12, 2017 – BAFTA Film Awards

Queen Mary’s Diamond Bar Choker Bracelet

This diamond bracelet was originally a choker worn by Queen Mary, which the Queen Mother remodeled into a bracelet. The bracelet presumably went to the Queen upon the Queen Mother’s death, and has now been lent to Kate on three separate occasions.

Previous Wearings:

  1. October 20, 2015 – State Banquet for China
  2. December 8, 2015 – Diplomatic Reception
  3. June 22, 2016 – EACH gala dinner
  4. March 17, 2017 – Day 1 in Paris

Interestingly, Kate has worn three tiaras in four tiara appearances in five years of marriage – all three of which have been loans from HM. Diana wore two tiaras in 15 years of marriage – one of which was a loan from HM and the other was borrowed from her family. Sarah, Duchess of York wore one tiara in ten years of marriage, which was purchased specifically for her. Sophie, Countess of Wessex has worn four tiaras in 17 years of marriage – two of which are definitely loans from HM, one was a one-time loan from a jeweler, and one seems to be a modern purchase from the current royal jewelers (which may or may not have been purchased by and on loan from HM). Camilla has worn three tiaras publicly in 11 years of marriage – one is her family tiara, and the other two are on loan from HM (Camilla has a third tiara loan from HM which she has never worn publicly).

So Kate has worn more tiaras than both Diana and Sarah (in a third and a half, respectively, of the time), and (if that modern tiara is in fact on loan from HM) is tied with Sophie and Camilla for number of tiaras loaned by HM to married-in women. Camilla wore all three of the tiaras she’s worn publicly in her first two years of marriage, though she’s only worn two tiaras loaned from HM and she hasn’t worn the Delhi Durbar Tiara since that one time in 2005. Sophie didn’t wear her third loaned-from-HM tiara until 2012, 13 years after her wedding. Five years after her wedding Kate is already on her third loaned-from-HM tiara. I’m not sure what any of this means, if it means anything at all, but it is interesting.

202 thoughts on “Kate Middleton’s jewelry loans from Queen Elizabeth

  1. Diana was extremely fond of pearls, so maybe that’s why she wore the Cambridge tiara so exclusively? She did wear it incredibly well! And, she had her family tiara, which Kate does not, so it would make sense for her to want to represent the Spencers as often as possible. Plus, Diana said the Spencer tiara was lighter than the Cambridge one, so when a girl has to make those fashion decisions, comfort often wins! I think Diana just wore both of them so well that she didn’t need any others. The Cambridge tiara may belong to HM but it will always be associated with Diana.

    1. Actually Diana hated this tiara. She often complained that it gave her a headache. I presume that’s why she wore the Spencer family tiara so often.

      Kate isn’t a Spencer by blood or marriage so doesn’t have the option of using the Spencer family tiara.

      Only the daughters and wives of direct male line Spencers ( or X aristocratic family) can use the family tiaras. Those are the social etiquette rules.

      Neither William or Harry are direct male line Spencers. Diana being a Spencer daughter could borrow it from her family, but she wore it so often that people thought it belonged to the Spencers and not the royal family.

    2. Diana didn’t wear the Lover’s Knot exclusively. She wore her all-diamond family tiara many times throughout her marriage. Though she claimed the Spencer Tiara gave her a massive headache on her wedding day, the Lover’s Knot is also very heavy and loud because the pearls bangs against the frame when moving. Diana supposedly didn’t like the CLK very much, which is why she kept going back to her family tiara.

  2. The Cartier Halo tiara looked a bit lost against Kate’s veil on her wedding day and I am not sure she – well her hairdresser – has mastered a good tiara hairdo yet – so the others she has worn have not been shown to the best effect IMO. When wearing statement necklaces and earrings one needs to make them the focus – not long or not well groomed hair that hides them. But she gets a tick for the Maple Leaf and Silver Fern brooches which looked good against the outfits she wore, and the bracelets are beautiful.

    Not sure if there is anything particular to read into the fact that Kate so far seems to have worn a broader range of HM’s jewels than has Camilla. AFAIK Camilla has access to quite a lot of the Queen Mother’s collection which may have been left to Charles ?

    1. Camilla wears alot of QM and her family jewels.

      I think this royal family jewels being loaned to in-laws has become more significant because the in-laws are from families without a substantial family jewellwry vault.

      Diana and Camilla wear their family jewels as well as royal jewels. All other in-laws need to borrow from the royal family vault since they enter the family without a substantial jewellery tradition or access or money.

      The individual royal family members do not need to borrow from the main family vault because they acquire their own eg the Kents and the Gloucesters, Anne and of course Margaret gave/had substantial personal collections.

        1. There are various necklaces, chockers and earrings.

          There is also a rumour that Charles actively buys her jewellery belonging to Alice Keppel when it comes on the market.

        2. Camilla often wears pearl chokers and necklaces that are her personal jewels, she has had them for years. Also, most of her brooches are her own, given to her by Charles or as gifts.

      1. +1 — And Diana was given a TON of gifts as well. That didn’t happen for Kate. The Saudi Crown alone gifting a sapphire and diamond pendant, earrings, a bracelet, a ring, and a watch, would not fly today with the public. But from the sound of it, Kate wasn’t given much from the BRF either. And I am pointedly including William in that.

        1. But Diana entered marriage as Princess of Wales, wife to the heir to the throne. Kate entered marriage as a royal duchess, married to the 3rd in line who won’t get the throne for possibly two decades or more and who has less of a role than PoW. It is appropriate that Kate wears less expensive clothes and jewels as there are two ladies who outrank her and thus should outshine her.

          I also think big jewelry just isn’t Kate’s style. She likes small, minimalist accessories. The few times she has worn a big piece of jewelry, it looked odd to me, like she was being forced to wear it (I’m thinking of that big diamond necklace). Contrast that to Camilla who wears big jewelry beautifully.

          1. Kate was still marrying an heir, a future POW and monarch.

            Nevermind that it will be decades, she had a state wedding commensurate with her future status therefore the jewels should have been spectacular.

            If any of that wasn’t important now, she would have been married in a private country wedding as apparently they would have wished if they’d been Normal Bill and Kate.

            The fact that she is a duchess has nothing to do with it.

            Her status(William’s status) in the future is why they are given spectacular baubles like that mansion in a Palace within KP and free helicopter rides on tax payer credit card.

            If timing of their future roles was an issue, they’d still be living in Nottingham cottage and sharing William’s Balmoral cottage as their only other home.

          2. I wasn’t saying that it should be one way or another. I was piggybacking Herazeus’s point that Kate didn’t come into the marriage with her own jewels and family jewelry. And I was adding that she wasn’t given the gifts that Diana received as well. It’s just part of the puzzle when comparing Kate to other royal ladies and wondering why she’s been loaned more from QEII. (I also mentioned in my other posts how I noticed that Kate doesn’t actually own pieces in her personal collection that are impressive, flexible and appropriate for many of the occasions listed here. I think that’s significant.)

            But Di wasn’t really one to pile it on either. And I have to disagree with you big time on Kate wearing fewer or less expensive things. By what stretch? Isn’t this one of the most common issues with Kate’s jewelry? She spends an obscene amount of money on blah, unsubstantial pieces, (that don’t have a chance of joining the royal collection or being passed through the generations). Things that are frequently repetitive and indistinguishable for one another. If you can see them at all. Because she doesn’t seem to know how to wear them. She does the same with clothes. Buys the SAME type of expensive outfits over and over again. (How many $4,000 bespoke blue coats does a person need?) Buys high-end, mega-expensive designer pieces and then alters them herself. Then she doesn’t style or properly accessorise anything. She buys one piece dresses that she can’t mix and match for the same reasons she spends £49,000 on a Cartier necklace that doesn’t go with most of what she wears. It’s thoughtless. But I don’t think it’s intentional or her style. She doesn’t ever look put together enough, as if she put a lot of thought into what she’s wearing. But she’s very “clever” about wearing things that look like nothing but are actually extremely pricey. (Again, I don’t actually think it’s truly conniving. She’s just boring and lacking taste and imagination.) I mentioned Kate’s choice to wear the Halo scroll as one of her earliest cons in that respect. Giving the impression that she’s a humble minimalist. The cost of Kate begs to differ. I don’t think minimalism has to mean Kiki earrings at a few grand a pop that look like something you can get at Claire’s. (And Kate doesn’t know how to accessorize and present those pieces either.) Nor do I believe that Kate’s alleged minimalist aesthetic justifies spending $50K on hoop earrings! So in that regard, Kate’s closet and jewel chest are still greatly disproportioned to her actual contributions to The Firm, which is unbecoming of the 3rd lady in the land. We still got a problem there. But like I said, Di wasn’t excessive or ostentatious about these things either. But she could make costume jewelry and an understated outfit look like a million bucks. And if Di spent a million bucks it would look like a million bucks 😀 Kate looks like that ^^^ Di looked like this http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Y2T2H-FVJpI/VmdCmQJw66I/AAAAAAAASpE/-t1Yn1on3qs/s1600/diana%2Bin%2Bteh%2Bcambridge%2Blover%2527s%2Bknot%2Btiara.jpg

          3. So would you say Kate’s lack of bling is her choice, meaning she doesn’t borrow as much, and that members of the BRF just aren’t buying her any? Do you think she should wear more and bigger jewels to suit her station?

            It seems to me that the Cambridges use their 3rd in line status as a reason to do whatever they want differently. They didn’t have a big state wedding and they take on less responsibilities. But they do enjoy privileges like they are first in line.

            Another reason I thought Diana got more gifts was because it was the 80s, a time of conspicuous consumption. It was deemed acceptable to give and receive jewels for important weddings. Due to austerity and changing fortunes, it seems less socially acceptable to flaunt wealth like that today.

          4. Hello Dorothy, when I said that I think Kate doesn’t spend as much on clothes and jewels, it is in comparison to Camilla and the Queen. They both wear bespoke clothing most of the time, so we don’t know how much they spend, whereas Kate wears off the rack. (Yes, she buys similar items and has them tailored poorly for some reason) but I bet she spends far less then Camilla or the Queen. As for jewelry, due to KMR’s excellent blog on Kate’s jewelry, we know she has lots of little earrings that all look the same. While they are more than I can afford, they are no where near the size (and I imagine cost) of the Royal jewels. And again, we only know the cost because she buys these (I think) from stores accessible to the non-wealthy. My mistake, if I made one, is assuming that Kate dresses down (as in, not bespoke) because it isn’t appropriate for her position. Should she have more bespoke clothing? Should she be borrowing from the jewel vault more often since she doesn’t have her own flashy jewels? I don’t know. But I sometimes think bespoke clothing would be better becuse then we wouldn’t know the cost and thus couldn’t complain about it. As for the jewels, who knows why Kate doesn’t have bigger and better? She has to borrow because she doesn’t have any of her own. So to me, the question is, why doesn’t she borrow more often? Based off the clothing and jewelry purchases we’ve seen so far, it seems Kate prefers a minimalist style. I’m curious to see if that changes as her position advances.

          5. Jet Texas: For the amount of money Kate spends on jewellery and clothing, she can dress exquisitely even if she isn’t buying bespoke and sticking to minimalist styles.

            London is full of exquisite designers of jewellery and clothing, bespoke, off the rack, antique and vintage.

            The way she goes about it is wasteful and adds nothing to the table.

            And by table i mean sartorial since that is where all her mental energy seems to be expended.

            Her go to everyday jewellery retails at an average of £3k

            For that here are a few options in that price range:


            And for that £49K plain necklace from Cartier, here are afew alternative options for that amount of money:


            For the clothing, she buys a new outfit per outing. Rarely repeats which is why when she does it’s memorable. At most once or twice out of entire year’s wardrobe.

            The only area she is thrifty is her evening long dresses where she has no more than 10 dresses that she has worn and reworn several times unlike her day dresses.

            Even though Camilla is bespoke, she often wears the same dresses many, many times. She tends to debut a new outfit for big occassions only and then wears them often afer that one occassion eg she bought a new outfit for WK’s wedding which she’s since worn many, many times and at other national events.

          6. I think I read that the Queen saves money by having her clothes made in-house. I agree that bespoke clothes would be a better choice for Kate. At least the waist would be in the right place.

          7. Hi, JET. Thank you for the reply. I think the number one problem is work. If Kate worked more we wouldn’t care about the cost of a lot of things. Period. It’s #1 and it’s huge. There were very few comments about her clothes when she and Will gave us other things of more substance to discuss with their back-to-back work days. If she worked more and didn’t get it wrong so often, but just settled into a groove and looked professional (which is my biggest pet peeve), we wouldn’t care if she was a boring dresser either. But I agree with you. I do think that a real stylist, having things properly tailor, or better, leaving things alone, would help monumentally. (Also as Fifi mentions, I’m tired of seeing Kate dress to “correct” her figure instead of complimenting it. Those are different things. We know your waist doesn’t begin directly under your boobs, Kate. It’s ironically unflattering.) Emphasis on getting a real stylist and someone to organize her closet, too. There’s truly no reason to have that many bespoke blue, and black, coats 😀 How many pairs of nude court shoes and beige clutches? That’s what I mean in comparing the coats to the Cartier. If you’re buying another bespoke coat or spending $50K on some earrings, make it count! I don’t believe she needs more, or it needs to be bespoke. She just needs to be smarter. She should’ve SWF Di and hired a team to help at least start creating her wardrobe. No one would have begrudged her that back then. But it didn’t fit into what she was selling. And she and Will both have that vibe of always knowing better. So she likely wouldn’t have accepted guidance. She probably wouldn’t listen if we told her that she dressed better in the first 18 months of her marriage when she still wore a number of high street brands. Going forward I’m expecting increasingly diminishing returns of increasingly expensive nothing.

            I find it so odd that with all the money Kate has spent on jewelry that most of it isn’t substantial or versatile enough for the occasions when she really needs to turn it up. But a woman who spends so much, borrows big, and busted out the Lover’s Knot on only her fourth tiara occasion, isn’t a shy or minimalistic woman. Kate’s hard to figure out in this regard. I think it’s because she hasn’t figured it all out herself. She clearly enjoys spending money unconscionably. But… I actually don’t know what bracelets she owns. Or if she has other rings besides The Precious. She doesn’t wear brooches… I think it’s just a combination of not caring and not caring. Not understanding or truly caring about jewelry. Not willing to put that much thought into any of it. So she sticks to the same things, including particular brands. But not at all concerned about the money she spends either. Likewise, she’s not bothered with truly building a wardrobe. But to be clear, I don’t think it’s either/or. There’s a stadium’s length of middle ground between Kate and piling it on and up like HM and Camilla. Then there’s a gulf the size of an ocean between the latter two and Queens Mary and Alexandra. I wasn’t really arguing with you on that. I just meant that Diana could wear some plain costume jewelry and it wouldn’t look cheap like most of what Kate wears. So it drives me nuts knowing that it wasn’t cheap at all! 😀

          8. Oh wow, Herazeus! I’m not much into jewellery, but that Russian rose cut diamond necklace made me stop and stare. Just beautiful and what a crying shame that Kate could have shopped around a little for something stunning like this rather than nickel and diming herself with a bunch of forgettable and indistinguishable pieces. She really needs an advisor for all of her purchases, I believe she is clueless!

        2. Kate was given huge emeralds(she wore the earrings and bracelet but there is probably a parure) that was a wedding gift possibly from Saudi. Everytime Kate has access to something big, she wears it! The problem is, is that William is cheap so she has to borrow. That is why she has no bespoke expect wedding gifts from other people.

    2. This is what really sticks out to me. She hasn’t properly displayed most of these pieces. The theme brooches are the only time we see her wear brooches. I don’t think she understands or even cares to understand jewelry. She just doesn’t carry these things well. I mean, could she be more “meh” at that state dinner? I think Kate only wore the Halo in the first place for the sake of that humble, middle class gal game she was playing and because it fit into the overall silhouette she was going for. (I definitely think that was her choice and wasn’t really appropriate for the future Queen Consort.) The fact that she so quickly went for the Cambridge and did so knowing she’d be on camera for the Queen’s B-Day Special, goes to show a lot about Kate…

      I don’t think there’s anything to make of Kate having more access to jewels than Camilla or Sophie. It truly might be as simple as asking. And their circumstances are all different, right? Like Kate outranks Sophie so they probably think that should be reflected in some ways. Like Camilla has actually already worn one of the collet necklaces that are kind of “reserved” for Queens. Sophie wasn’t a full-time royal when she first married Edward even though she was technically the second lady in the land for a moment. But even so, she debuted HER aquamarine tiara in ’05. (This is a little sketchy with officials claiming it’s a loan from HM. While it also sounds like the G. Collins made the suite for Sophie who is the only person to wear those pieces and it was created in ’05. So who knows.) She already had her awful, but historic, wedding tiara that was loaned from the Queen. And she’s worn a different aquamarine loaner liara from HM. Kate’s been loaned things, but nothing’s been bought or crafted for her. The starter tiaras don’t suit Camilla at all. And there was no way in hell that she could or would ever wear the Lover’s Knot. She has access to her own family taira and those left by the Queen Mum. So Camilla has access to all the known tiaras that suit her, except of course the ones that are completely associated with, or owned by, The Queen. But above all else, Charles keeps Camilla dripping in jewels. Her collection is insane and growing! Kate’s isn’t. (But you wanna see why Kate probably thinks nothing of spending thousands on pieces? http://queensjewelvault.blogspot.com/search?q=alhambra) Kate has those super expensive Collins and Sons earrings and pendant necklace, that they made no mention of when she first wore it and you could barely see it against her blue dress when she last wore it meeting the Obamas at KP. It also didn’t go with the style and neckline of that dress at all. See what we’re talking about? Even her obscenely priced Cartier necklace and earrings look like something you could get at the mall and wear to work with a nice monochromatic wrap dress. (That necklace also would work with most gowns, patterned outfits, and certain necklines.) It’s nothing but obscenely priced nothing pieces and rinky dink jewelry. The Queen’s loans are pretty much the only substantial pieces we’ve seen Kate wear. What from Kiki could Kate be wearing to many of these occasions if the Queen didn’t loan her something?

      1. I love your username ?

        I agree about Camilla wearing the CLK. She would be chased through the streets. I’ve been interested in the pieces Charles have given her. They are beautiful pieces. It’s also ironic as the Queen Mum wasn’t fond of her.

        1. Thank you Rhiannon. I love your username too. That’s one of the greatest songs of all time.

          There are so many typos in my post.
          + The “theme brooches”, including the Air Cadet Dacre, are the only time’S’ we’ve seen her wear brooches.
          + It should read that the Cartier hoop necklace would NOT work with many ensembles.
          And there are a half a dozen more typos in there 😀

          It’s interesting to look at each angle though, isn’t it? Like no way could Camilla ever come near the CLM. I mentioned upwards that Diana was given a truckload of gifts upon her marriage. And that especially applies to the Queen Mum. (Perhaps that wasn’t because of Di, but rather because Di married her beloved Charles. And yet somehow I don’t think the same would’ve gone for Camilla, lol.) Of course, the QM is not around anymore. But Kate wasn’t given much from the BRF. Maybe she didn’t ask for much. And maybe the Queen’s loaners are Kate asking, while others don’t, and a matter of Waity not having substantial pieces to wear anyway. They must be planning to add to the taira collection or feel that those three are going to sustain Kate for the next 25+ years until she’s queen. ‘Cuz the BRF don’t share 😀 And Kate hasn’t pulled off any of the tiaras she’s worn so far. Can you imagine her trying to wear The Greville? LMAO!

      2. I think Kate should simply wear £1000 notes artfully origamied for jewellery, and clothing made of said notes. I don’t know why she bothers with anything else.

      3. Hi Dorothy,

        IMO the Queen is giving Kate higher jewel access because:

        (1) she’s trying to demonstrate to the public that she is supporting Kate and not undermining W&K marriage, as she and the BRF was accused by Diana of doing. Diana famously accused the BRF of being cold to her, not offering support, etc.

        (2) Trying to support Will. HM is a smart cookie, she has to see how whiny Will is, and doing her best to help them with the “pressures” of royal life. As if Kate wasn’t gunning for those “pressures” since day one–although we’re told she’s been such a super trooper dealing with all this unknown… I’m going to stop right there because BS.

        (3) Trying to cement the monarchy with the next generation, a very hostile one especially to wasteful spending and tight economic times. I think HM is being very careful not to make Kate “too grand” like she thinks they did with Diana (they didn’t–Diana just had a way about her that the media highlighted to their advantage–it was like gasoline and fire).

        However, she does want the public to see Kate as a royal. She probably would have given her an Order if Kate hadn’t flashed so much. If HM is waiting for a flash-free year, she’s going to pass on first.

        This might explain why Kate buys half the Kiki junk. Don’t spend your money on good stuff if you want HM to say “here, wear this for crying out loud!”

        That may explain why Kate was wearing HM wedding bracelet. She probably had it on for the banquet and in comes Kate, looking ok but not like a notable royal. HM slips off the bracelet, hands it to her, and Kate scores.

      4. The only importance I see here is that people need to stop saying the Queen doesn’t lend Kate a lot of royal jewelry since she clearly has. That’s why I brought up how many tiaras the others have worn. Because a lot of people on blogs and forums claim HM doesn’t like Kate which is evidenced by her not giving Kate a lot of jewelry to wear. But HM actually has let Kate wear a good amount of royal jewelry. I didn’t include it in the post, but I looked at Diana’s Jewels and My Small Obsession (which covers Sophie’s jewelry) and Kate has worn about as much royal jewelry as those two have. So the idea that HM doesn’t lend Kate a lot of jewelry is incorrect.

        1. I agree, the outlets that are forever trying to generate readership by creating narratives about HM and PP being at the root of any problems are a lot garbage. I think you did a good job highlighting an important point that most of us didn’t really think about the significance of. And we definitely know that K&W are to blame for their own issues. I still think that year after Diana died was a scary time for the Queen to see people so angry with her and she takes defensive moves to never have that happen again.

  3. I’d love to know what the Queen thought when Kate wore the Hyderabad necklace and then hid it with her gigantic hair. The Queen has SO many jewels in the vault I’m not sure the loans are significant, though it is an interesting subject. The real story is how Kate, five years in, still doesn’t have any Royal Family Orders. Its a true slap in the face.

    1. I agree, Red Snapper. I’m sure the reasoning os what we all know for sure. When king, do you think Charles will give it tk her? Btw, does William have it?

      1. It’s interesting that William has received all the baubles that befit his status as heir presumptive, but has never received anything baubles that reflect either personal service or affection from HM.

        Harry on the other hand has received personal orders that only HM, usually in gratitude or affection. If Harry marries a woman held in as high esteem, she’ll receive those orders pretty quickly.

        1. Herazeus, what honors/orders has Harry received that William hasn’t? I’m sincerely asking because it fills me with glee that Harry has things William doesn’t (yes, I’m petty). Will has the order of the garter and Harry doesn’t. I hope when the next OTG becomes available it goes to Harry instead of Kate. But Diana never had it, so why would Kate get it? Im rambling, sorry.

          1. Prince Harry was made a Knight Commander of the Royal Victorian Order by the Queen on June 4, 2015. The RVO is awarded personally by the Queen for services to the Sovereign. While it is a lower order than the Garter or Thistle – both of which William have – the RVO is more a reflection of the esteem HM has for Harry. William’s Orders are a reflection of the position he holds as heir to the heir.

            Aside from Philip, which is a special case, none of the married-ins have received the Order of the Garter from HM. So Kate will not receive it from HM. Kate will most likely not receive it until William is king.

          2. The order of the garter isn’t something given to the women for simply marrying into the family.

            None of the women receive it. Anne and Alexandra are princes of the blood and that is a crucial difference as to why they have it – i’m being facetious here since they have to show merit as well.

            Othrr women in the order are either there on merit eg Margaret Thatcher RIP or because they are monarchs themselves eg Princess Beatrix of the Netherlands formerly Queen.

            Harry was given the Knight Commander of the Royal victorian order.

            It’s the cross on a purplish blue ribbon hanging from his neck.


            Of the top 10 people in the line of succession, only William and the Yorkies ie B and E don’t have this order.

            Of the Wider family, the Kents, Gloucesters and the Wessexes are all in the order.

            Here is more about it.


          3. “William’s orders are a reflection of the position he holds as heir to the heir.”

            Yes, blatantly so. William was 26 when he was inducted into the OotG in 2008. Charles was inducted when he was ten years old! (I guess he was made the PoW around the same time.) How had one served the sovereign and contributed to the nation by that point? William was even specifically inducted then so he would be the 1,000th member. They saw that opening, waited, but he otherwise would’ve just received it earlier. Yet I do wonder how HM feels about it now. Probably nothing. It’s why I’m still shocked that she hasn’t just given (not honored, just given) Kate the family orders by now. I also wonder what William thinks wearing it knowing that what little honor or merit applies to these things in the first place (for the BRF) he didn’t even measure up to those expectations. The Thistle was also conveniently timed with The Jubilee as well. Just as Charles, the Duke of Rothesay in Scotland, was given the order during Liz’s Silver Jubilee in 1977.

      2. The Royal Family Order is female-specific. As a male, William cannot receive the RFO.

        1. Thank you Herazeus and KMR for that info. I’ve learned so much on this blog, not only from the blog but also in the comments. Sadly these informative tangents get lost in the comments and I have trouble remembering which post they were on.

        2. I’d say by the next State Banquet in November she will have the Family Order. Cambridges complain, they receive to placate them.

    2. HM Family Order is for the ‘Royal Family.

      Waity continues to be kate miiddleton (except the trick of using royal status, entitlement by way of tax payers funds and the Duchy millions), as is bill g&c middleton.

      1. We can still use her maiden name and say she doesn’t act like a royal, but she is actually a royal so that is not the reason she doesn’t have the RFO.

      1. and she got herself jewelry, the eternity band and earrings probably pretending they were from him as that is what we are told.

      2. A teddybear? Seariously?! I really hope this is not true!! May I ask, where did you read that? I hope William behaved like a gentleman, not like an idiot, and got Kate some serious sparkle for the children’s births!

        1. I recall reading it recently. She was the one who bought herself the fancy earrings, the eternity ring, etc; the companies confirmed it, once the press salivated over the idea of William buying them for her.

          Well, Charles bought them, I suppose, considering it’s his cash.

      3. I thought the Cartier watch was a push gift after George’s birth!! Please don’t tell me William was so cheap he gave her a flipping stuffed toy. That toy would’ve been better off going to George!!

          1. The media speculated, and continues to speculate, that William gave her that watch, but we shall never know since Cartier never comments on their clients.

            What we do know is that Kate ( or the Middletons) buys her own jewellery AND William is too cheap to spend any money on jewellery, not even Kate’s engagement and wedding rings.

            Kate first wore the watch publicly in February 2014 and assumption was made that William bought it for her.

            I am inclined to disbelieve that since he has never coughed up for any jewellery for her, AND all these luxury companies send samples and or look books to the palace regularly and that is the more likely route of her acquisition of that watch.

          2. Good point, Herazeus. I pegged William as cheap when he gave her Diana’s engagement ring. Some may find it sentimental, I found it questionable. Imho, it was convenient because we all know how William won’t put effort into anything.

          3. Knowing how cheap he was, that was my 2nd thought when that ring was unveiled.

            The first was shuddering thought about the wisdom of giving a ring from a doomed, unhappy marriage never given in love to your beloved.

            As much as i enjoy jewellery, cursed jewellery – as i see it, always makes me shudder and i never buy/accept it. Too many bad omens. Perhaps this is why Kate looks like a shadow of her former self.

          4. Remember reading somewhere (can’t remember where, nor when, nor the veracity of info), that Diana’s engagement ring was originally supposed to be for Harry. William had made some arrangement with Harry in order for William to give Kate the ring for their engagement….

          5. Hmm. Giving Kate ‘a ring …never given in love to your beloved’ might also have echoed William’s thoughts too. He seems to have been snookered into that marriage, silly boy, by Carole. Cheap as he is, I wonder if William would part with cash for anyone he loved?

          6. River: Harry originally picked the ring.

            At the time of Diana’s death, there was a big, well publicised effort to keep the public informed of royal family empathy towards Diana and her boys especially after that Funeral eulogy where Charles Spencer had essentially called the royals out for being unfeeling.

            When the boys went to collect personal momentos from her, it was very well publicised.

            What they picked was equally well publicised and backed up by various royal staff selling books/ newspapers to the public, including *Paul Burrell, Diana’s ex-Butler.

            *Paul Burrell maybe shady as hell, but let’s not forget his trial was stopped at the personal intervention of The Queen the day before he was due to take the stand and potentially be compelled to tell all.

            Harry picked the ring whilst William picked the watch.

            I can understand why William picked the watch because it belonged to Diana’s own beloved father and she had kept it as her personal momento of him. William would have been old enough to appreciate that fact.

            Fastforward to 2010 engagement and the ring appears in Kate’s hand.

            PR goes into overdrive to explain how William ended up with the ring, including that tale of a pact between the brothers.

            Rumour has it that Harry was in a public space when he learnt of the engagement and was as surprised as the rest of the world at the appearance of the ring.

            I’m inclined to think the pact is as tall a tale as the engagement story which we know he borrowed from a friend in their circle who was engaged around the same time and whose engagement story appeared in the media afew days before William’s engagement.

          7. I think I missed something…Herazeus what do you mean the engagement story was borrowed? I haven’t heard of this before, did they not get engaged in Kenya? I always felt a bit bad for Kate, that Will took her to the home of an ex to ask her to marry him…but did he not even do that?

          8. Eve: i mean that exactly. Borrowed is a polite way of saying plagiarised.

            Friend of the royals Natalie Pinkham was engaged during similar timeframe. The DM published the story of her engagement a few weeks/ days before WK’s engagement announcement.

            When WK sat down to their engagement interview and told their own engagement story, it sounded very familiar, and i wasn’t the only one having de ja vu. Many royal blogs and long time royal watchers immediately spotted the parallels.

            The only difference between the two versions were the countries the engagements occurred, william claiming Kenya whilst Natalie was Botswana. Apart from the countries, all other details were exactly the same word for word.

            Further, the way the story was recountered in the engagement interview was not exactly clear. William told the story of the engagement in kenya, but then Kate immediately told of coming back from Scotland to tell her mother that she was engaged, before William quickly interjected that he’d told Mike already. Yes, she namechecked Scotland instead of Kenya.

            It’s a strange interlude in an interview that is full of holes and self serving lies.

          9. Herazeus,

            Whoa! I don’t remember Scotland being mentioned in the engagement interview! Now I’m uber curious as to how they *really* got engaged!

            All I remember was Kate sitting up straight as a board and very egger, as if she were a child in class waiting for the teacher to call on her.

      4. A teddy bear?? Hmm, which friend did William “borrow” that aw shucks cutesy little gem from? We know he likes to take other people’s experiences and make them his very own! A real pro at rewriting history, I think he even believes it himself.

  4. How can Kate have all those loans? Well William complained, can’t have mommys tiara an option for Harry’s wife can we?

  5. I swear, I didn’t notice some of these pieces since they were covered via Kate’s mop of hair. Those sapphire earrings are lovely (and would’ve matched the ring perfectly) but I didn’t see them because of the hair and 80s-sitcom-couch-style they call a dress (#sorrynotsorry #thatdresswashideous).

    And don’t get me started on tbat gorgeous necklace, hidden by hair and teal dress! Sigh……

      1. Hey Rhiannon!

        I’m hanging in there, will be happy this coming weekend when it’s a three day weekend but for now I’ve got to survive this work week. Might be moving into a new apartment in six months (lease will be up and the rent fee is driving me crazy) but we’ll see.

        I’m looking forward to the new season of DWTS!! Also, I was talking with a transplant friend about dating and how difficult it is for people like us. I’m so glad I’m not alone in this regard.

        How are you? How is the physical therapy going? Hugs!

        1. Good luck with the move. It’s frustrating to do it, but understand about the rent. The dating field is tough. I hope that you find someone who treasures you!

          I’m still pushing. I have been allowed back into the gym for upper body only. My trainer has worked with GBS patients so she won’t let me get away with much, lol! My pt is slow and steady. I go back to work after the holiday weekend. I’m a bit nervous as I still get fatigued easily. But it will ll be okay. If anything, GBS has taught me compassion and patience.

          1. I hope both you and Kimothy are doing as well as can be. Certainly sounds like it. So pleased you have a trainer familiar with GBS and who won’t let you go too far. You have made amazing progress since that diagnosis just a few months ago; I still recall your comments about not feeling well.

            Kimothy, I feel for you if you need to move. It’s incredibly unsettling emotionally but if it eases life financially, it’s worth considering. If you do move, let’s hope it’s to somewhere better and with a nice available man living next door.

          1. Wish we could talk DWTS, KMR! They’re revealing the cast tomorrow morning on GMA!! I can’t wait *and* both Maks *and* Derek are back as are Emma *and* Allison!!

            **does happy dance….LOVE Derek** (I also like Emma and Allison and I’ve been following them on Instagram! 😀 )

          2. Can’t wait for the cast reveal! I really like Allison ever since So You Think You Can Dance.

    1. I wonder what became of Diana’s beautiful sapphire set given as a wedding present by the Saudis, I think? There were earrings, a ballerina-set pendant, that bandeau, and more. Seems funny that Kate has never worn it since she LOVES blue and it would go with the ring. Unless she has and it was eaten by her “glorious mop”, as one article called it.

      By the way, Satorial Splendor has a good item on Queen Victoria’s sapphire coronet that’s trying to leave the country. Explains why family pieces are now lent, not given.

      1. I wonder who has her gobstopper sapphire pearl choker. That thing was a showstopper. Loved it then, love it now.

        I hope it’s not converted back to brooch and remains a choker for all time.


        I do not think HM is a jewellery person. She has rarely added to the vault and her attempts at creating something new from existing jewels has been bad.

        Diana was fantastically creative with her jewels. Who would have thought a fusdy sapphire brooch would make such a fantastic, yet youthful looking choker!!

        Or the time she wore an emerald choker as a headband.

      2. I just read a book written by one of Diana’s spooks (someone named Simone), and according to her Diana buried the huge Saudi sapphire in the garden to “cleanse” it of bad energy. The next day, the sapphire was gone, likely stolen.

    2. I agree it’s a shame when she actually wears nice jewelry only to cover it with hair so we can’t see it properly.

  6. I’m in jewelry heaven! Theae are some beautiful pieces that all have interesting history. Outside of the CLK, HM loans Kate small pieces. Not sure if it’s due to Kate’s minimalistic stylAe. The most interesting loan was the wedding bracelet from Philip.

    My only concern, like Kimothy, is that most of the pieces are either hidden by hair or clothing or not worn properly (tiaras specifically). After 5 years in the BRF, her stylist should know by now. I think given the significance of each piece, it needs to be at the forefront of each outfit.

    On another note, I thought Kate looked absolutely beautiful in the picture of her wearing the Maple Leaf Brooch. I wish we see her like that again.

    Thanks for this gorgeous review, KMR!

    1. I was stunned when I read that HM loaned her wedding gift bracelet, if I received a gift like that I wouldn’t loan it to anyone!

      1. I think that if you’ve been brought up with a jewellery vault, wedding bracelets aren’t as sentimental.

        As far as we know, HM is only sentimental about her *pearl necklace worn every day except at state banquets and opening of parliament speech, her **engagement/wedding rings and her ***pearl studs also worn everyday except when she wears statement jewels.

        *the necklace is a present from her father given on her 18th birthday.

        **the diamonds in her engagement ring come from a tiara once owned by Philip’s mother whom she loved. Rumour has it that she has asked to be buried with her rings.

        ***the pearl studs were gifted by her grandmother.

        1. According to Her Majesty’s Jewel Vault blog, she wears more than one 3-strand pearl necklace, all very similar. I sure can’t tell them apart.

  7. KMR: a small correction. The CLK tiara returned to the royal family when she divorced not death. Ditto all other royal jewels on loan to Diana.

    Any ‘diana’ jewels that are given to Kate by William come from jewels deemed Diana’s personal property and kept in the divorce.

    According to her will, those Jewels were to be shared equally by William and Harry except for the *ring of doom and a cartier watch which became personal property of the boys after they were invited to choose a personal keepsake immediately after her death.

    * one day, we shall find out how William came to have the ring because it was picked by Harry whilst he picked the watch. The stories keep changing and history has been re-written to say that he picked the ring to make his use of it seem more romantic.

    Too bad many of us were alive then and the Palace was leakier than a sieve and we remember.

    1. Romantic, instead of creepy and cheap. Am I the only one who finds it disturbing he gave her his dead mother’s ring she didn’t even like and a symbol of a failed disastrous marriage? It was not romantic then when they painted it as such and it ain’t romantic now.

      1. I totally agree, Ellie. After waiting 10 years, she deserved her own ring. However, in my mind, I see Carol putting the idea in his head. “Just think, love, you can connect your two loves together. Would you like extra cheese on that toast?”

        In retrospect, this was the first of many throwbacks to come.

        1. ‘Would you like extra cheese on toast?’ made me laugh so hard.

          I do wonder about the engagement itself considering the story was stolen from a friend. What really happened, I wonder? Will we ever know?!

          It’s sad William didn’t esteem Kate enough to give her a ring of her own but I think it just shows how he sees her. The good time gal who wouldn’t let go, and nobody else wanted such an awful guy but a woman who could gain everything and had given up her life for him.

          1. Judging by the ring he gave her when they were at St. Andrews ( I think it was at that time)…he’s cheap and has bad taste. Not a good combination, but I suppose one cannot be blessed with every good virtue haha

          2. Which ring did William give Kate at St Andrews? I am aware of a broach and a set of earrings that Kate’s dog ate or am I remembering wrong. I can’t believe after two kids Kate just got teddy bears.

          3. I think it was possibly antique. Gold with a small ruby. A very “young”, dainty looking piece and no flash to it at all. I can’t exactly remember when she started wearing it though, but I do feel like she got it at some point during their Uni years…and please anyone correct me if I’m wrong on the giver/ time frame/ etc !!

          4. Did some digging…looks like she’s had it since 2005 and is thought to be a gift from William as it has her birthstone and his. I really don’t like it at all, but to each their own!

      2. No, it’s just off. Bad luck all round. Mind you, Kate keeps parading it at every opportunity; her left hand is always very deliberately prominent in photo shoots. It is synonymous with Diana so the link is always there. Interesting to conjecture whether Carole had any influence on choice of ring; I think it would have been perceived as a coup to have Kate wear it.

        1. Willnot ‘I am a Prince’ may have also felt ‘they’ bow to him, not the other way… that is, to spend time selecting a ring. Never mind jewellers would be over in a heartbeat.

      3. HI Ellie, it’s always bugged me that William proposed with this ring. First, personally I would want a ring that was just mine, that fit my personality. Secondly, as you said this ring is symbol of failed marriage and great deal of pain. Thirdly, what a pain to have to wear such an iconic piece and have to deal with the constant comparisons. In the engagement interview, William said that no one was comparing Kate to Diana but by giving Kate Diana’s ring he set her up for a life time of comparisons.

      4. I believe Willy is devoid of emotional intelligence (hence, he should not venture anywhere near the mental health issue). If I were Kate, I would have been dismayed and creeped out by such gross insensitivity.

        1. Yeah, I’ve often wondered if Kate really likes the ring or just acts as though she does. I agree, I would have been kinda pissed by such insensitivity.

      5. Also agreed. I’d be pissed off if the guy I’d been with for nearly a decade gave me his mother’s engagement when he proposed!! What the heck?! A woman deserves far better than that!

      6. I think people’s ideas of romantic are different. I would want to pick out my own ring, and would think going with my fiance to pick out a ring we both liked would be the most romantic option. I think a man picking out a ring by himself beforehand and proposing with it would be very unromantic, but there are many women who think that scenario would be the most romantic. Some people find the idea of wearing a family ring romantic, but I do not. So I think it just depends on the person. I hope the ring Kate got was the one she wanted.

        1. My thoughts exactly. I really hope that somehow Kate loved the ring enough to overcome its origin and commented at some point about her affection for it. But I’m so Pollyanna in my views of the world.

          1. I was given my great aunts ring, by my great uncle. I only met my great uncle a handful of times. My grandmother left me a broach with a watch which my aunt then demanded she have. I think that it depends on what the girl wants to do. Picking a ring out together is good or wearing a family ring. I think that the family ring has more sentimental value. William wanting to give Diana’s ring and not considering Kate says a lot about him. I think the way Kate keeps flashing the ring is appalling though. There is no discretion.

        2. What is romantic about a ring with such totally negative associations and history? Anyone with a shred of sensitivity would grasp that fact and not foist that history on their betrothed and proffer something fresh and lovely (and blingy).

          1. It wouldn’t be romantic for me, but it was William’s mother’s so it could be romantic for them. Like I said, what is considered romantic depends on the person.

  8. Wonderful post. As I love Royal jewels, I loved reading about them. I think Kate does not suit big jewelry, both because her style is more for small jewels and because she is not classy enough to carry large and powerful jewels. My God, how will be Kate wearing the crown jewels when she is queen.

    1. Personally, I can’t imagine Kate wears the consorts crown. Although, I can’t imagine William wearing the Imperial Crown or Edward’s Crown either…the mere thought sends shivers down my spine…and not in a good way 🙂

  9. I suspect the Duchess of Cambridge got the Cambridge tiara because… Cambridge. I think she could look good in the Cambridge emeralds as well, if she would style them right. She has the coloring for emeralds. The halo tiara suited her minimalistic personality and dress (I don’t mean that to be insulting, but she does seem very low-key; not all low-key people are boring). I’d like to see her in it again with the right updo this time.

    I wonder if they could set up a jewel trust for the daughters of Diana. Except for the engagement ring, which is now Kate’s, put all of Diana’s jewelry in the trust to be loaned out to any of her daughters-in-law, granddaughters, etc. No fighting over who gets what and the jewels get worn, as they ought.

    1. I didn’t know the history of the Cambridge emeralds. Didn’t realise the Dehli Dunbar emeralds were one and the same. What a scandalous story. Love it.

      I wonder if David’s stash of emeralds that he took with him into exile came from this lot or a different mysterious stash that the royal family is touted to have.

        1. Queen Mary is my idol when it comes to wearing *all* the bling, *all* the time. She wore ropes and ropes of bling, wound round and round and dripping, everything all at once and made it all look fabulous. Sigh and swoon.

          1. I love that about all the titled/moneyed women of the early 1900s! They have 3 diamond necklaces with 5 pearl ones on!! We need to bring that trend back in style!=)

          2. I was watching some old British Pathe newsreels on Youtube. Even as recently as the ’60s and ’70s, the royal ladies rolled out the rocks a lot – for film premieres, to the theater, lots more dinners, etc.

            I realize it’s not the custom (and probably not very PC) these days, but I do miss the bling alongside the dapper gentlemen in dress uniform or white tie. I’m getting old…

          3. I think part of the problem is that we’ve become such a casual attire society=( when I’m at the airport I’m still surprised to see people in their pajamas and what not. Yes, you want to be comfortable but jammies are not meant to be worn in public. Not even Sunday best is worn, when I go to church people are wearing shorts and sweats. My mother is always appalled and I get the I taught y’all better lecture.

        2. That lady was a magpie!

          Story goes if she came to your house and commented on something she liked, it meant, “Give it to me!” Yikes!

          1. I know! “Oh, I love your hutch!” “I love your necklace…” hint hint!

            Too bad we aren’t queens, huh? 🙂

      1. Augusta, Duchess of Cambridge, bought a lottery ticket. She won – and the prize was a box of roughly 40 cabochon emeralds. She had jewelry made (a necklace and earrings with stones left over) and left them to her daughter, the Duchess of Teck. The Duchess left them to her son Francis, who suddenly died a bachelor, but he did have a mistress – one Nellie, Countess of Kilmorey. Needless to say, Francis’s sister, the future Queen Mary, was not at all happy. She went straight to Nellie and somehow (no one knows the real story of how exactly she accomplished that) got the emeralds back. Mary then worked her magpie magic and created new jewels for the Delhi Durbar.

        I do wish I could have been a fly on the wall when Mary and Nellie had THAT little discussion 🙂


    2. Hi Graymatters, I think it would be great is a trust was set up in order to “loan” out Diana’s jewelry. I wonder how much of Diana’s jewelry the boys kept? I watched a documentary about Diana a while ago and they mentioned that quite a bit of her jewelry was costume, so I wonder if they kept any of those pieces.

      1. I’d say they got rid of the fakes as they would have gone bad. The real are probably in a vault at BP waiting for Harry to be married so they can finally split all her belongings 50/50 including jewels, antiques, funiture, clothing, etc.

  10. Jumpy claps, jumpy claps, Jewels!!!! I love these posts and what a great way to start my week, so thank you KMR!!

    I have a couple of questions I’m hoping someone can answer, when the Queen Mother died isn’t is possible that some her jewels went her favorite grandson, Prince Charles, for his wife and future daughters-in-law to wear? Secondly, is it possible that William requested Kate be loaned the Cambridge Tiara, specifically because of the connection to his mother and because of the Cambridge name? Thirdly, I recall reading that the Queen gifted Diana the Lover’s Knot tiara with the caveat that it would not leave the royal family?

    Imo, the Halo Tiara suits Kate the best while when she wears the other tiaras it reminds me of a little girl playing dress up. And while I’d love to see her wear the Nizam necklace again, she really must put her hair up to pull it off. It seems to me that the Queen “loaned” Kate the chandelier diamond earrings on a rather “permanent” basis, of course they could never leave the family but are in Kate’s possession.

    The one piece of “jewelry” that is obviously missing from Kate’s jewel box is the Royal family Order. To me, the fact that it’s missing speaks louder than any whispers about why the Queen supposedly loaned Kate this piece or that piece.

    1. If the Queen Mother had left any of her estate to Charles, he would have had to pay taxes on it. The sovereign to sovereign transfer allows the former sovereigns to pass their estates to the current sovereigns without the current sovereign incurring taxes. So the QM would have left everything to QEII to prevent anyone from paying taxes.

      As far as I am aware, the Queen uses life-time loans instead of gifting to prevent jewels from leaving the family. In Denmark, Margrethe gave Alexandra (Joachim’s first wife) a tiara and in the divorce Alex got to keep it since it was a gift and not a loan. HM does loans so that that sort of thing doesn’t happen.

      Who knows why Kate wore the Lover’s Knot tiara. It’s totally possible that William asked for it. We just don’t know.

      I agree with you that the Halo suits Kate the best. It’s more her style than the other two.

      1. We have a legit way to bypass inheritance tax which the QM was said to have used.

        If you transfer your assets to the future beneficiaries 7yrs before your death, the estate becomes tax free.

        The Queen mother put all her assets into beneficiary trusts a good 7yrs before her death such that at her death, she was thought to be penniless at best and badly in debt at her worst.

        The debt was to do with her ongoing expenses rather than her assets.

        Charles inherited alot of her estate, and dollars to nuts that transfer would have happened 7yrs ahead of her death.

        Princess Margaret wasn’t so lucky nor were her children.

        She transferred her assets to her kids to beat the 7yr rule only for the kids to turn around and sell them off from under her. She was apparently espevially hurt when they sold off the Mustique house cutting off her easy access to a property on the island.

        And what was left untransferred ended up costing the kids a pretty penny in inheritance tax leading to the sale of substantial number of items.

        1. Oh, it’s so sad to hear what happened to Princess Margaret. I know she had her issues but to have her kids do something like that is tough to hear.

          I just wondered about the QM leaving stuff to Charles as Camilla’s engagement ring once belonged to her and Camilla wear the QM’s tiaras.

        2. It was said that Charles inherited Birkhall from the Queen Mother. But I wonder if, in fact, the Queen actually “owns” it (an inheritance from George VI along with Balmoral et al.) I do know that the QM was supposed to be “financially responsible” for the maintenance, salaries, and such. Can one say the QM was ever financially responsible with a straight face? LOL

        3. Well, her son David did sell the Mustique house but by 1999, she had had her first stroke and was already in a wheelchair – I think her traveling days were over by that point. Perhaps the kids needed money to take care of her? His family did live with her in KP while she was ill.

          David put the majority up for auction in 2006 or 2007 and the items sold for £14 million. The taxes due were only £3 million according to the press.


          It was claimed that the Queen, Lord Snowdon and Sarah were angry and it caused a family rift. He did wait until Margaret had passed away.

          I can sort of see both sides of the coin. Why keep jewelry (especially a tiara) that you have no chance of wearing? Sometimes you have to turn it back into real money. Sounds crass, I know.

          The biggest bitterness was about Margaret’s painting (a sister portrait to one of the Queen which is in the NPG). David did end up buying it back from the auction. At that time, he was chairman of Christie’s and still is, as far as I know.

          1. I never knew about this; thanks for the info. I would have been upset by the personal notes if I were family. I wonder who would have wanted the portrait if David hadn’t bought it in?

      2. Princess Margaret had a disappointing life, but her children are people who turned out to be grounded and self sufficient. Especially, Sarah Chatto who was featured in the recent video honoring the queen. She is reported to be kind, humble, down to earth and really lovely. That’s a great legacy.

    2. Ha ha! I have no idea what you look like, but I am picturing you jumping and clapping. Yes, this is a great post. Jewels are so fascinating. KMR has really been on a roll this August.

    1. Usually when papped in private her hair is up, off her nape.

      In public life, it’s rare, but it has happened. A ponytail here and there.

    2. I think the Swedish royal hairdressers need to go on a road trip, giving lessons on how to style tiara hair. Seriously, nobody rocks tiara hair like Queen Silvia!

  11. So ladies, what tiaras or jewelry do we think we’ll see on harry’s future wife? I’ve regularly thought about this because it seems like so much of HM’s jewels are already associated with another member of the family. The only tiara I can think of that isn’t worn by other women in the family are the Strathmore Rose (although some say this is too delicate to wear now). Any guesses for what tiaras we’ll see on the future Mrs. Harry??

    1. I personally covet the King George VI Victorian Sapphire Suite. It is sp beautiful. That and the Queen Mary Fringe. Let’s not forget the Dehli Dubar!

      I will gladly wear any of them!

      1. Oooh the King George VI Victorian Sapphire Suite collection *is* so beautiful! I also like the Dehli Durbar Tiara! The Queen Mary Fringe is a bit too pointy for my liking. 🙂

        Edited: I also like The Greville Tiara!

          1. So true Sarah! Camilla can really rock the larger tiaras and necklaces, sometimes even better than the Queen (please don’t tell her I said that). I think she’s comfortable in them and it shows, where as Kate reminds me of a little girl playing dress up with Mummy’s pearls.

        1. Ditto wrestling the Grenville tiara from Camilla.

          There are still many more tiaras in the vault, plus there is always the possibility that Harry marries a woman with a family jewellery vault of her own like the Spencers. Plenty of those types of families still about.

      2. I suppose I figured that the Queen wouldn’t loan a new princess a tiara that she’s already worn extensively. She seems to like to keep a lot of the tiaras for herself. Although, she is the queen, so good for her!

    2. Well, would Rhiannon look good in:

      Queen Mary’s Fringe – worn by the Queen and Princess Anne on their wedding days?
      or perhaps
      The Oriental Circlet – worn a lot by the QM. I think the Queen wore it once since the QM died, so it languishes in the vault, unseen and unloved. It’s actually one of my favorites, but does look a bit uncomfortable to wear.

      Maybe Charles will have the frame on the Strathmore Rose replaced? I read somewhere (don’t ask me where, though) that the frame is silver and gold. The silver would be a bear to polish plus it’s a relatively soft metal so it’s likely very fragile after all these years. It would be stunning reset in a platinum frame. Charles does have a keen eye for jewelry and isn’t afraid to splash some cash out for it. We can only hope!

      1. I would love for harry’s future wife to wear the Queen Mary Fringe at her wedding. It would be quite a statement for her to wear the same tiara the queen wore when Kate didn’t wear it.

    3. I love the Lotus Flower, but I think Harry’s wife will be in Sophie’s position, and not get much of the spectacular pieces.

      At least, Rhiannon, you’ll get a ring of your choosing. ?

      1. Here is hoping that Sapphire choker is a possibility for Harry’s wife.

        And Rhianon, what Fifi said. No ring of doom for you!!!?

  12. Are they doing any type of event in Canada that is bling worthy or do we know yet?
    I can understand not being into big jewelry but if you’re going to sell the image of princess your need to bring the bling! The Queen can be modest in her daily wear but she always changes it with her lovely brooches. I think we all want that mix of modern working royal yet also want the little piece that makes part of the fun watching them and that is the access to resplendent jewels!
    If I was Kate, I’d be dancing around Anmer with a ton of jewels on practicing my fake posh accent=)

    1. People seem to be getting bored with them, many of their recent visits haven’t been huge headlines like they were when they were first married or dating. Glamming it up a bit with a white tie tiara event probably wouldn’t hurt to get people excited. I also wonder when they will be visiting the states again.

      1. Kate rarely makes the front page of the papers in England like she used to do even as recently as 2015.

    2. Hi Sarah, personally I don’t think there will be many dressy, evening events since they will have both excuses…I mean children with them. They will only be there 8 days/7 nights and on their arrival day after the arrival ceremony they will probably be whisked away to rest, then there’s the private family day and I assume evening, so we’re already down to 6 days/5 nights. As I recall in Australia/New Zealand there were a couple of days when they did one engagement and that was it, I would hope for such a short visit that won’t be the case but with them you never know.

  13. Didn’t William give Kate gifts of Jewelry while she was his fun/go too girl? Kate got a birthday present before the split back in 2007 didn’t she/ Why William never spends anything on his wife now with Jewelry. It is just Kate that seems to purchase expensive earrings. I adore the lovers knot tiara. Interestingly enough a tiara belonging to Queen Victoria, the one I like has just been saved.

    1. I don’t think it’s been saved per se just had an export ban put on it until the end of December. Unless someone just purchased it? I have mixed feelings on the export ban. If no one in the uk wanted to purchase it from the Queen down to a museum a think a museum in another country should be able to purchase it. Then be able to go to a private purchaser after that.
      They did the same with a Jane Austen ring. I think Kelly clarkson was top bidder, they put a ban on it and the Jane Austen museum was able to raise the funds to get it.
      I’m all for items to be in a museum so the masses can enjoy them but find it interesting that these two items were held privately so should technicallybe able to sell wherever. what happened if they were sold quietly?

      1. Banning export of culturally significant items is a thing here.

        It happens at least once a year on random things.

        I remember the Jane Austen ban.

        A few years ago it was a Van Dyke Self portrait.

        I hope we can save this tiara.

        That said i am deeply shocked that this left the royal family. It’s a known piece, seen in a few victoria’s paintings.

        Plus i love the Elizabeth Taylor-esque way Albert jewels to Victoria…..just because he could.

        1. I think I’m most surprised that the BRF hasn’t snatched it back up to put in the fold considering it’s history.
          My favorite Elizabeth Taylor quote has to do with Princess Margaret, when she asked if it was the Taylor-burton diamond, she quipped how large and vulgar it was then had the audacity to ask to try it on, ET then said “it doesn’t look so vulgar now, does it?!?” I don’t know if it’s true or not but I love that story. Plus, if you’re living that type of lifestyle is there really such a thing as too big?
          I would love to have a Richard burton or Albert to give me gifts like that!

          1. I love that Margaret/ET story too.

            When ET’s jewels were auctioned, christies held a public viewing of them in various cities around the world.

            I had a very good look at the Diamond ring in that Margaret/ET story. Absolutely beautiful and flawless.

            Yep, we need an Albert/Burton jewellery giving other half.

            Few men get this.

          2. Sarah and Herazeus? May I join you?

            I too am waiting for my Burton/Albert other half to spoil me with things I enjoy such as jewels and clothes that fit me! (According to my Pinterest, I have expensive taste in clothing and put-together outfits!)

          3. Of course! I think every woman should have a RB/A to spoil them with pretty baubles!

            I can only imagine how beatiful it looked in person. When I was at the smithsonian, I pictured how lovely I would look with the hope diamond around my neck. Also, when it’s time for the Chrisite’s magnificent jewels auction, I always dream big=)

      2. Sarah, I just had brilliant idea. My birthday is in September which means sapphire is my birthstone, so how about all of us chip in and buy me that necklace??? I promise to keep it in England, in fact I’ll loan it to the V&A Museum to exhibit when I’m state side. Oh my goodness, I’m getting so excited! This will be the best birthday ever!!

        1. We could do a go fund me! =) I said in the previous post we could let Rhiannon wear to her wedding to Harry then pass it around. I saw that they were adding a £1million to the cost for the VAT so we would roughly need £6 million/$8 mil. No problem

      3. I am sorry. I just read the article briefly. I think those items are best in a museum for everyone rather than a private collector. I would have thought Kate would leave something for Harry’s wife, to wear.

        1. There’s only one person who matters to Kate and that person is Kate. The woman is as hard as nails, and brutally ice-cold which shows on her face, not to mention the sundry weird expressions. She’s also got a masculine look from her jawline down. That Adam’s apple and the long muscle on the side of her neck is so off-putting. Somehow my eyes become fixated on that area and it becomes difficult for me to look at anything else on that face. Usually, tiaras, earrings and necklaces enhance the wearer’s appearance, but on her, such pieces seem to blend into the background and do nothing for her.

          Waity’s body is unattractive — it looks masculine, not feminine. Her long torso accentuates her boobless and hipless parts, and even though the clothes are altered something still appears to be amiss. Thus, with such over-powering masculization coupled with the skeletonization of her bony frame, how can jewelry enhance what’s not there? Even on her wedding day, the one day which is a so very special day, the tiara she wore did nothing to enchance her face. And the earrings were too tiny for her long face.

          Earrings should be proportionate to one’s face, which makes the small Kiki earrings appear so insignificant on her ears and a huge waste of money. Additionally, the beautiful necklace, the gift from the Nizam to the Queen for her wedding, Waity killed its beauty by having her wiglet and extensions splayed around her shoulders. That kind of necklace needs to be worn on bare shoulders. It’s obvious waity knows nothing about dressing and accessorizing. What a shame!

          Regardless of the cost and beauty of the jewelery can anything gorgeous and feminizing add to what’s not there? Her male androgynous traits are overshadowing any female traits she may have going for her. Waity lacks charisma and femininity. Her deportment is putrid. She needs to learn how to accessorize with jewelry and colors. Women who are sophisticated do not wear a beautiful necklace and cover it up with wiglets and extensions. The jewelry should be the focal point. And, just because a piece of jewelry is costly does not mean that it will automatically transform her into a gossamer and/or an ethereal beauty.

          In sum, Waity does not have what it takes to look and behave like a sophisticated woman. What’s the saying? — you can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear?

  14. Why is it that everything looks dull on Kate and just kind of disappears (even when her hair is up)? Is it because she looks uncomfortable, anxious and awkward a lot of the time. She just lacks a spark.

    1. She lacks the dignity and poise to pull off wearing fabulous jewelry. It is hard to fathom how she can make priceless jewels look like a cheap replica. Sometimes I fantasize that cut stones (especially diamonds) have a mind and soul of their own and they grumpily refuse to sparkle for her.

      1. I think it’s her air of disinterest/boredom that spoils the effect. Confidence?? Girl’s got it in spades…has since she sashayed down that runway in her underwear and the “little skirt that wasn’t”!

        1. To me, she looked overly sedated in the photo on the catwalk. Sedated, or just thinking, “Mama said there would be days like this.” And, knowing her mama, she just figured she had to go through with it, praying for the results Carole promised.

          I don’t know, Ray. I don’t see a great level of confidence in Kate on a steady basis. Oh, sometimes, she looks very smug, other times, especially when entering the room where an even is being held, she looks like she wants someone to hold her hand and see her through!

          Love your “little skirt that wasn’t!” Great description.

          1. She did look a little zoned out that day, but I believe that was her attempt at channeling the “haughty high end Idon’tgetoutofbedforlessthan$10000aday catwalk model” look. How prescient, if so 😉

        2. I didn’t like the tiara Kate wore on her wedding day. Too dinky. And, the veil didn’t allow it to be shown off. I’m still — and always will be — a major fan of the Spencer Tiara. As a little girl watching Diana and Charles’ wedding on video (over and over and over), that was the real deal in my “I want to be a Princess, Too” obsession.

          I wonder what it would have looked like on Kate. Not that she would have been allowed to wear it.

          1. I like the Spencer Tiara as well. It was just so sparkly during Diana’s wedding. It also has a very fairytale quality to the design.

    1. Polls can be and are manipulated. I find it a little too coincidental that the poll was published at the same time william was on his best behavior during the last engagements.

      Where are all of these alleged William fans hiding?

      Besides being Diana’s son (that card is flimsy and worn)
      What has William done to inspire people? Pretty much nothing. And he has done himself no favors by being as bland and private as possible.

      He should’ve married a maxima or queen mother type…

    2. I don’t know if it’s a measure of how popular he is vs. how unpopular Charles is. Britons on both sides of the political aisle have serious concerns with how much Charles has interjected himself into politics, etc. He does himself little favors.

    3. I have a solution. King Henry sounds really good.

      That way, PC can still get involved in political matters he chooses and Will can go on vacationing while whining. Carole wouldn’t be too happy though. Pippa might have to break up with James and remind Harry that she has a willing uterus. I can’t see any of the three Midd sibs having the nerve to tell mommy no.

    4. Pah. They polled 2000 people. So 1080 people out of 61,000,000 want William to be King (that’s .003%)?

      Really – pollsters could ask a different segment of 2000 people in Britain, and get a totally different result. And they do. Spin pollsters.

      To illustrate, a poll of 2,200 Americans done by the National Science Foundation in 2012, 25% weren’t aware that the Earth revolves around the sun. I will be the first to admit that the average American may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer and might have the attention span of a gnat…but I never, ever believe “polls”. Statistics are made to be PR tools for spin doctors.

    5. I think it just has to do with the shine Diana has on him still as well as the PR effectiveness that makes people think he’s this wonderful, charming guy and Harry’s the loser drunk. (And, quite frankly, Diana’s PR offensive against Charles worked wonders. Charles can never, will never, recover. I think that is what Diana wanted, as well. And I think he knows despite having tried with that gross Mark Bolland.)

      Anyone who follows them would know Charles will put up and shut up and do his duty. William? Never. Can you imagine them stepping up? If this consists of their ‘stepping up’ God help Britain and the Commonwealth.

      As much as I think Charles would be a good king I have this weird feeling it won’t happen and HM dies after him. I hope not.

    6. Unless Charles dies before the Queen dies then William can not be the next King! It doesn’t matter how often these polls come out it can’t happen!

  15. I read that article yesterday. The veracity of polls depends on the age, education and geographical location of the people polled.

    Albeit I am not living in England now, (I was born British) I would like to see Charles becoming the next King, not William. It’s Charles’ birthright and he had to do everything that was demanded of him, even marrying a woman he did not love. William would be a huge mistake as he is too lazy and unprepared. They are on opposites sides of the spectrum — Charles is very smart with money and William knows how to waste it. Between William and Waity, the BRF will be bankrupted in the blink of an eye.

    I had hoped that Queen Elizabeth would have abdicated in favour of Charles similar to what the Dutch Queen Beatrix, did for her son, Willem Alexander. Somehow, It doesn’t appear as though QE wants to let go.

    1. HM would never abdicate. Uncle David turned her life inside out and upside down.

      Even though I *feel* it would be a good idea (Ma’am, let Charles take over, then you and Philip can put your feet up and relax…), she pledged that “I declare before you all that my whole life, whether it be long or short, shall be devoted to your service and the service of our great imperial family to which we all belong.” She has never faltered in her promise. And she never will.

      1. The Queen also knows that whatever popularity the monarchy enjoys in the UK is tied to her alone. Public support is for her, not for the institution. Once she relinquishes the position, the House of Windsor will decline. She is hanging on to preserve her legacy along with prolonging the family’s position. Polls favouring William to succeed is just PR mischief from KP, a hit to Charles on the anniversary of Diana’s death, a kind of public “f**k you dad”.

  16. Hi all, I am surprised everyone is saying Kate likes minimalist jewelry. I thought the same until I looked back at her 20’s/dating years. She wore larger jewelry. It was costume jewelry, but it was very noticeable and didn’t fade into her hair or clothing-more statement pieces. So, I tend to think this shift to barely-there jewelry is not her choice. She used to have far more fun with jewelry.

    http://www.clothes-fashion.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/29/Cowgirl.jpg Large necklace

    https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/61/c1/23/61c123881ca546e7e9b349ebd65591e4.jpg Large earrings

    http://img.thesun.co.uk/aidemitlum/archive/01293/KateParty_02_1293779a.jpg Larger necklace than what she wears now

    http://cdn04.cdn.justjared.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/middleton-clubbing/kate-middleton-clubbing-03.jpg Large earrings

    http://img004.lazygirls.info/people/kate_middleton/kate_middleton_kate_middleton_gets_into_a_black_cab_after_partying_the_night_away_at_the_mahiki_night_club_in_london_10_may_2007_06_H139REC.sized.jpg Also larger earrings

    I now people’s taste change, but my point is, she used to wear larger jewelry (at least earrings mostly). So, I tend to think she would still like to but might have been told not to. There are better examples out there, but I was in a hurry and found these quickly 🙂

    1. I think the make over in the jewellery dept goes along with the strategic make overs she has given herself over the years to fit with the circles she thinks she should be a part of.

      It’s been happening since she was a teen.

  17. Thank for this really interesting post!! The differences between the BRF and SRF jewel wearing and sharing are incredible. I think it speaks volumes the amount of jewelry HM has loaned to Sophie/Kate versus Diana/ Sarah. Sophie has been described as her favorite daughter-in-law and she obviously really respects and loves Kate, probably because of her fondness for William and Harry. One interesting point is although Kate has no orders, she seems to be lent more significant jewels (ones belonging to HM’s mother and sister, jewels she is still fond of (brooches, bridal bracelet) Also, she is lent more iconic pieces like the necklace and “Diana” tiara.

  18. I don’t think it is the BRF job to gift Kate jewels. All the husbands gift their wives(and daughters) jewels, so it is William’s job to gift her jewels; he is just cheap. I think the Queen loans Kate things she rarely wears the tiara(CLK) was because she is letting them dig their own grave. A lot of people raked the Cambridges over the coals double over because of that saying they didn’t deserve it. Kate gets what the Queen rarely wears, she’s not fond of her at all, just look at the quotes she has said about Kate through the years.

    1. All of the royal women get the jewels the Queen doesn’t or rarely wears. The Queen isn’t going to loan her favorite pieces to anyone, including her daughter and fave daughter in law.

    1. And? Sophie doesn’t have any family jewelry either. Also, Kate comes from a well-off family and went to private boarding school. That’s not “low class”.

      1. I think ‘low class’ in this instance is referring to tacky, nouveau behaviour rather than actual class distinction.

        Tacky has no class.

        That said, class distinctions in the UK are not determined by money. Think of the indian caste system as the best way to explain the British one, but less rigid and more fluidity across class distinctions.

        Kate’s family, despite their wealth are Middle class just like Sophie’s family who have no wealth.

        And at the extreme ends of the scale, think of the Billionaire Ecclestones who are working class vs the aristocratic duke of St Albans who has no money beyond his townhouse in London.

        That said, when it comes to heirlooms, buying your own is considered tacky and is a good way to insult the lower classes – see feud between aristocratic Alan Clarke MP and Millionaire author Jeffrey Archer.

        The way the Middletons keep buying aristocratic/ upper middle class accroutrements is a surefire way to mock them endlessly.

        1. You’re not allowed to buy your own things (with the intention of turning them into heirlooms)? That’s dumb. Someone had to buy that stuff at some point, so what does it matter if it happened 100 years ago or yesterday? Charles buys Camilla a ton of jewelry, why is he not mocked for it?

          1. It’s historical snobbery. Illogical, but we cling to it. Inherited is always best. If you buy new things that are potential heirlooms, you do it discreetly. Showing off is to be avoided at all costs.

            I don’t think people realise that Charles buys Camilla all that jewellery because their individual backgrounds speak to family jewellery vaults.

        2. Plus the Middleton’s throw money at PR in order to keep themselves in the public eye as ‘high profile’; unbelievably tacky, unnecessary, and vain.

          1. Wicked thought……but what if terribly rich James Matthews is persuaded to buy Victoria’s coronet for Pippa. Then both sisters can have matching priceless bling!!

          2. Bwahaha I like your evil way of thinking! Can you imagine the comments if they did?!? Plus, I’m sure Kate would hate that pills had her own personal item that could be tied to Queen Victoria

          3. The evil glint in your eye, Herazeus, is lighting up the world. Honestly, I wouldn’t be surprised if Terribly Rich James Matthews was ‘persuaded’ to do just that…

        3. Looking at the pictures of Kate’s Kiki collection does not convey to me that those pieces are of heirloom quality. Had I not read the descriptions, I would have automatically assumed that they are imitations. The diamonds are not top quality, look common, man made, synthetic, simulated, fake, faux, such as cubic zirconia, zircon, etc. The same goes for the semi-precious stones, which are cultivated in labs, in essence, they look fake.

          I know that I’m being redundant because I mentioned a few days ago that earrings should be in proportion to one’s face, except studs. It’s quite obvious that Kate does not know much about jewelry, and is on a shopping spree to build up a collection of jewelry at Charles’ expense,at an accelerated pace. If her intention is to label those pieces as *heirlooms* then it would have been better to purchase a few substantial pieces from a renown jeweler such as Cartier, Harry Winston, Van Cleef & Arpel, and/or Tiffany’s. Had it not been for this blog, I most probably would never have heard of Kiki, e.g., who’s the designer behind this line?.

          I think I understand what Herazeus is saying. For jewelry and other items to be considered *heirlooms* they should be part of a family collection that has been bequeathed or handed down from previous genarations with much historic and monetary value. Over the years, heirlooms increase in value because of the pedigrees attached to them. The Taylor-Burton ring and pear shaped diamond necklace, are world-renowned pieces. The Queen’s Mum and Princess Margaret’s tiaras are heirlooms, and can be traced back to their origins. An experienced jeweler, I’m sure, would not pay any attention to the Kiki stuff .

          More importantly, there has to be pedigrees, appraisals and certificates of authenticity for high quality jewelry. I’m positive that the jewelry Charles has given to Camilla are all appraised and are accompanied by authentic certifications, because Charles is a very informed, generous man, and would buy only the best for his beloved.

          Charles gifted Kate with a beautiful diamond bracelet when she married William. And, just look at how badly he is treated by those two ingrates. It’s so sad that both Waity and William are so myopic and are not intelligent enough to think ahead of the serious repercussions and/or ramifications their actions will eventually cost them. When that does happen, I hope they’ll remember that *Comeuppance is a bitch*.

          For Kate, the Kiki stuff suits her personality — no vision, and over-priced little trinkets. I’d bet if her Kiki collection were to be appraised it would probably be about 1/4 of what she paid, if that much.

          Yes, one could proffer the argument that her family is wealthy, but it hasn’t always been that way for them. Her mother’s parents were supposedly living in public housing, and Carole & Mike worked for a not so prominent airline. They moved to Dubai so that Mike could earn a better salary. They moved back to England and later started the party business. From what I’ve read, her mother used to stand at the school gate and push her party pieces to the other mothers who waited for their kids. Carole also sent Kate and Pippa with sample bags to the neigbors to pedal the stuff.

          Kate entered into that marriage without much to offer. Zero work experience, costume jewelry and a cheap wardrobe. Albeit her parents had accumulated some wealth, Kate being bankrolled by her mother, could not spend as she is now doing because Charles is footing the bills. As a result of Charles’ generosity, Kate has become extremely wasteful because Charles and/or no one in the BRF has put the reins on her carefree spending. For Kate, shopping IS her job.

Comments are closed.

Back To Top