The Spencer Tiara

Trying to make sense of this -the Duchess of Cambridge wore the Cambridge tiara, correct?

And Meghan, future duchess of somewhere, will borrow the Spencer tiara from the Earl Spencer for her wedding to the balding ginger?

Looks like her head had a close encounter of the third kind.

Yes, R1. The RF cannot deny the request as the tiara in question is not of the RF's. Though the Spencer family could deny the request for the family tiara, it won't.

The newer Royal Bride may even request the tiara's original accompanying wedding veil. She's shameless.

When the bride married the heir to the throne she did not have to borrow a tiara from her in-laws, she had her own famous family tiara. Thus the Spencer family tiara became known to the greater public. The piece was never in the royal collection. Diana died, her jewelry went to her family. On his wedding day Will didn't need his future queen to wear a borrowed piece she could not keep. The few times Kate wears a tiara they've been loaned by The Queen. One wear was another borrow from the Spencer family, it was HM's wedding gift to Diane, the Cambridge Lover's Knot piece. Megan could wear it on her wedding day, having the two to choose from. OR .... Harry will become the Duke of ...., Megan his Duchess. Say he is to be made the duke of Sussex or Strathearn or Ross or Kendal, in the royal vaults there may be a tiara not seen in a long time, say the Sussex Tiara, or Strathearn or Ross or Kendal Tiara. It would be suitable for Megan's wedding day,

The Spencer tiara is the most beautiful one I've ever seen

My guess is she'll go with something that's got pizzazz.

I never realized before what a mess Diana's hair looked like on that day.

This American divorcée will be trouble. Fergie v2.0

Rubbish. She's becoming a member of the royal family and will either wear a family tiara or flowers in her hair, which is indeed a royal traditional option. Queen Victoria herself married with a ring of flowering sweet myrtle in her hair.

My bet is on a small family tiara perhaps even smaller than the Cartier Halo (Catherine's choice for her wedding), which hasn't been worn in a while. There are dozens upon dozens to choose from in the HM's vaults.

There are entire websites dedicated to the Royal Jewel collections. This is just one of many:

Meghan can buy her own tiara from Etsy.

There are loads of Tiara's in the Royal Collection that haven't been worn for years.

The Teck Crescent Tiara might be a good choice for Meghan.

Seeing these other posts, I think the Spencer tiara might be too much for a small wedding. A smaller tiara would probably be more appropriate. But I think Harry wants a part of his mother at the ceremony.

Their wedding date is May 19. I didn't realize they are getting married so soon

[quote] One wear was another borrow from the Spencer family, it was HM's wedding gift to Diane, the Cambridge Lover's Knot piece.

I can't make heads or tails out of this sentence.

All I can tell is the queen gave something as a wedding gift to someone named Diane. Diana Ross? Aunt Diane, with whom something is wrong?

Is the claim here that Kate Middleton asked to borrow the Holy Headband & was denied by the Spencers, but that Megan Markle will wear it as the Spencers are expected to say yes to her or else already have? And the purported reason for this inequity is that the ginger was his mother’s favorite ?

The Queen has had Tiara's made in the past using jewels that she owned, most famously The Burmese Ruby Tiara (pretty garish for today's taste) in 1973.

I'm fairly sure that the current Countess Spencer (Karen Villeneuve, a Canadian) would regard The Spencer Tiara to be hers to use exclusively. It would be like borrowing someone's underwear.

[quote]"Can we discuss the Queen of England?" she began raspingly. "Look for a woman in a housedress and a hat; that's her. She wears soap on a rope for jewelry; the cardboard is still on her earrings. . . . Her daughter Anne, ask her how many children she has," and Rivers made a neighing sound. "Now is that a horse?" she asked--in case the crowd hadn't gotten her message.

I doubt that's true at all, r16. Women in aristocratic families lend jewelry to one another all the time. the queen herself has lent most of her tiaras to her sister, daughter, daughters-in-law, and now granddaughters-in-law.

Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall is the first Royal since The Queen Mother to make use of 'The Greville Bequest' none of which would be wearable for younger Royals. I Imagine many of them will be redesigned after her death.

R18 The Queen is a bit of a special case, she is the family custodian of a vast jewel collection, a lot of which she has never worn or not worn for many years. Charles will inherit the lot when he becomes King, I don't see him trying on Tiara's?

I wish I could wear a tiara.

R20, if you're going to presume to consider what members of a family of royals will or will not do with their jewelry, perhaps you could appear less illiterate by using the correct plural for "tiara," which does not include the Walmart apostrophe.

Dumbass.

R22 I do know the correct plural, it just seemed pretentious to use it.

Since when is correctly using an apostrophe pretentious?

Now, now girls! You're BOTH pissy!

Ladies, C'mon! Let's just stick to tiaras! Rise above the common pettiness. Hey, over here, look at the Vladimir Fringe Tiara!

R22 R24 The correct plural is [BOLD] Tiarae [/BOLD] not [BOLD] Tiaras [/BOLD].

I have a hat like that.

R27, Stand your ground!

No bejeweled cock ring for the groom?

Thanks R28 After 10 years of Latin at school I know that Tiara is a Latin word and that you should always use the Latin plural if possible, Tiaras is just a modern affectation, but it would have seemed very pretentious if I'd used 'Tiarae' in my first reply at R20.

r30: No, but there is the royal family's Royal Prince Albert, originally made for Prince Albert... that will adorn Harry on his wedding night.

More pictures of pretty princess tiarae, please.

😬😬

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The idea is that pretty women like the Duchess of Cambridge don't need to wear much jewelry because they're so pretty anyway the jewelry would just distract from it. But old women like Camilla wear the gaudiest stuff imaginable (so long as its real) to distract from their horrible faces. When the queen dies, i would bet you money Queen Camilla will wear things like the Burmese Ruby Tiara, or the Grand Duchess Vladimir Tiara with the Cambridge Emeralds installed, which is one of the queen's biggest showstoppers.

Yeah, R35, someone who looks like Camilla might as well slay "Fuck it, I'm gonna pile it on while I can!".

And I have to admit, that emerald tiara would look really striking in her platinum hair.

R34, camilla parker bowles wears the big, garish necklaces to try and distract from her big, sloppy, saggy knockers that hand down to her navel. It doesn't work. Some people can wear a garbage bag and look marvelous. Camilla's the exact opposite of that. She can wear the finest gowns and jewels and always manages to look like the dog's dinner. She always looks horrible. And it takes a team of about 7 to 10 people to make her look like that

Can you imagine what she'd look like if she didn't have all those people?

[quote] I'm fairly sure that the current Countess Spencer (Karen Villeneuve, a Canadian) would regard The Spencer Tiara to be hers to use exclusively. It would be like borrowing someone's underwear

You're fairly sure? Where did you come up with that nonsense from? If that were true, then how did Diana wear it to her wedding?

crown of the hole....consumed with relish.

Why is Camilla wearing a giant Splenda packet on her ancient boobies in r19 and r34?

R40, That 'Splenda packet' is the Royal Family Order of Queen Elizabeth II. We were schooled about Family Orders in some other recent thread.

r40, she's wearing the Royal Family Order of Queen Elizabeth II, an honor bestowed upon her by the queen.

For reasons I've never understood, royal honors are always, always worn with a pinned colored silk patch placed between them and the woman's dress.

The necklace at R19 and R34 is the Greville Festoon Necklace, part of the Greville Bequest.

Note at the links at R19 and R34 that it can be won with all 5 strands as Camilla is wearing it.

But there is a picture at the link below that shows the Queen Mother, to whom the jewels were given, wearing only 3 strands of the necklace.

[QUOTE] I'm fairly sure that the current Countess Spencer (Karen Villeneuve, a Canadian) would regard The Spencer Tiara to be hers to use exclusively. It would be like borrowing someone's underwear

R38 You're fairly sure? Where did you come up with that nonsense from? If that were true, then how did Diana wear it to her wedding?

Diana was allowed to wear 'The Spencer Tiara' because her father Jonnie Spencer was at the time of her marriage 'The Earl Spencer'. The current Earl Spencer's daughters will also be given the privilege as the jewels of the great family's generally pass to the eldest son.

I doubt that his Nephews wife to be would want to wear it as it would be deemed inappropriate.

As a bit of a qualification I would like to point out that HRH Princess Alexandra did not inherit any of her Mother Princess Marina's Tiare, they instead passed to Prince Edward, Duke of Kent and his wife. HRH Princess Alexandre instead wears The Ogilvy Tiara which was purchased by her husband the Hon. Angus Ogilvy, but does include some stones that she owned.

The Spencer tiara may end up on the auction block - the current Countess Spencer is a financial mess. The Earl and his third wife were bunking up in the house that the Earl's wife's ex-husband rents for her, to raise their 2 children in. The Countess also gets $15-20,000/month child support.

Once those golden eggs- oops, children - hit 21, no more $$$ for the Earl/Countess.

"Two years ago, a firm of accountants, Gursey Schneider, whom she hired to deal with her divorce finances, won a court judgment against her for an unpaid bill of $136,000 (£84,000).

The future Countess Spencer has also fallen behind with her taxes owed to the state of California. In 2008, the authorities placed a legal order on her after she failed to pay $3,603 (£2,218) in taxes. "

A year later, she was in arrears of almost $8,000 (£5,000) and last March the state again sought the recovery of unpaid taxes, this time $17,489 (£10,770).

R37what queenly observation. R38 because Karen was not the countess then.

The Spencer family have been in a huge financial hole for aboujt 60 years, Raine (formerly The Countess of Dartmouth) brought a lot of money in and she couldn't save them without selling a lot of valuable art.

The current Earl, Charles Spencer's 3 marriages have about finishrd the dynasty off. The lease on Spencer house in London may save him if The Duke of Grovsner the willing to purchse back the remainder of the lease.

Nice dirt on the Spencers, even if the tiara is in danger. I hope the new Duchess picks something elegant and filled with diamonds. She'd also look wonderful in emeralds next to her ginger.

To follow up what I said at R44 I firmley believe that Charles will either pay a few million for a new tiara for Meghan or they will dig out somethig from The Royal vaults,

R44 If Meghan wanted to wear the Spencer Tiara she will wear it because Earl Spencer would glue it to her head personally to get a couple of headlines .

If the Spencers are so hard up for money, why don't Harry and Charles just buy the Spencer Tiara for Meghan? Or what that be too gauche? (I know, silly question).

I don't think Charles will buy a new tiara for Meg. It would be in bad taste, especially following the engagement dress debacle. Times are different. We all know they are wealthy but buying something so extravagant and flaunting one's wealth, especially when there are so many other tiaras she can use, wouldn't go over well when so many people are suffering and she has tried to brand herself as a humanitarian.

With so much to choose from, and with a history of redesigning jewels, the family may just allow Harry to do that for her from the vaults. It would be a lovely gesture.

[quote] especially following the engagement dress debacle.

Which debacle?

She spent (or actually Charles spent...) $75,000 on the dress she wore for her engagement photos.

So... The high-end designers weren't clamoring to give her an engagement photo dress for free, then?

Interesting.

R56 the women of the Royal Family are not allowed to wear "freebie" designer dresses - you are thinking of Hollywood.

I have a few options from my “collection” at Party Pieces.

Good for Meghan.

I don’t keep up with the Spencer family, what happened to that sprawling country pile they had, Althorp House or something like that. Did they sell it? Why else would the current Earl be living in a smaller house owned by his third wife’s ex husband ?

I think the Spencer tiara worn by Diana (there are two tiaras in the family) is pretty but bland. I think it’s fine for the wedding of the heirs second son because it’s not that large and flamboyant. I think it’s a bad luck tiara though, considering the current Earl’s failed marriages and Diana’s. Not sure if Diana’s mother ever wore it but that marriage was a mess too.

Diana is buried at Althorp and they open the house to the public for a period each year as a way of offsetting the costs of maintaining the house. I guess they are stay in the London home only part time?

Those huge old estates are incredibly expensive to maintain, even for families that have been smart about their money. Since Diana is buried there I can't see them ever selling it. Maybe someday when William is King he will set up some kind of endowment or trust for it's maintenence or something like Prince Albert bought his mother's childhood home.

Diana and her brother had falling out over the tiara. He wanted it back in family possession as it was only on loan and she was making it her own.

[quote]I'm fairly sure that the current Countess Spencer (Karen Villeneuve, a Canadian) would regard The Spencer Tiara to be hers to use exclusively. It would be like borrowing someone's underwear.

Oh, come on, //ARY! How on earth is loaning jewelry “like borrowing someone’s underwear?” The Queen herself lends out pieces, and, you know, so do normal people, too! They’re family. Families lend heirlooms out for weddings. This is not some unprecendented breach of protocol, it’s pretty normal for anyone to do this for family, from commoners to the Queen. It’s not like Meghan is some complete stranger.

R62, There is also The Althorp Living History Collection of authorised reproduction furniture, objet d'art, Et accessoires, which further aids in the upkeep of Althorp House. Some of the pieces are of excellent quality, others fair to middling.

If Meg does get to wear the Spencer tiara it will be nicer than the one Kate wore. She can't show up the future queen, can she? I can see why Kate didn't wear it, if it was an option. She already got the engagement ring and wearing the same tiara as well just might have been too much.

Somewhere in the royal vaults there must be a Sussex Tiara. The future Duchess of Sussex can wear that.

It may be ugly, R67. Our Meg is nothing if not the duchess of streamlined elegance. It's her thing. Nothing too big or gaudy.

Meg should go modern and ditch the tiara alltogether.... The £75,000 dress and a nice choker would be enough.

I think Megs should borrow this amazing sapphire tiara from QEII.

Not only would the sapphires look amazing in her dark hair, and it'd be something-borrowed-something-old-something-blue all in one, but she could take the chance to get some of Diana's Saudi sapphires to go with it.

^^^interesting fact, the sapphire tiara was originally worn as a necklace by a Belgian princess. It was inverted and put on a tiara frame. Convertible jewels are the best, you get more than one look for your money.

The tiara Kate wore on her wedding day was just gorgeous - any tiara larger than this rather modest one would've looked out of proportion.

I read somewhere that Diana isn’t actually buried on the estate due to the wet marshy soil. She’s buried in the parish church next to her father. Anyone else hear that?

The tiara Catherine wore for her wedding was almost one of the uglier ones in the Windsor collection. Princess Margaret stopped wearing it in the 60s and Anne in the 70s when they got better looking pieces.

I suspect that the Queen will gift Meghan with something from the Royal vault. And Charles will definitely gift them with a royal heirloom. Meghan and Harry have options. The thing is, most everything that comes from the Queen belongs to the State or to the Royal House of Windsor and so if Meghan & Harry divorced She wouldn't be able to keep them. They'd go back to the tower vaults. Now, there must be some thing out there that has value that someone will be able to sell. Something with history behind i that would be a real treasure for the Crown. It breaks my heart to realize some day Betty will be gone and Camilla will be wearing all that shit plus a white gown to accompany King Charles to the opening of Parliament. Ugh.

Whatever belonged to Diana, because it has to be from her personally, not the Spencers, Harry will get something of value.

I wonder how MM will wear her hair the day of her wedding. I think any tiara is much more becoming with an updo, but I don't think Meghan's face is right for that kind of hairstyle.

[quote] Queen Victoria herself married with a ring of flowering sweet myrtle in her hair.

Why aren't girls named Myrtle anymore?

For the same reason they aren't named Dorcas r78.

The Queen bought a Tiara for Sarah Ferguson from Garrard

That’s the one Eugenie is supposedly going to wear at her wedding.

Sophie Rhys-Jones wedding Tiara is a bit of a mystery, but thought to be made up of pieces already owned by The Royal Family.

Those are really the precedents to look at.

r82 They knew she was marrying a gay man, so she didn't get the good stuff.

So if a tiara is loaned by the Queen, does QEII decide what gets loaned?

For example, will Sparkle have to wear what she is given to wear?

I find it hard to believe QEII would just open the vaults and let Sparkle pick whatever she wants. Her choices so far, the inappropriate and way too expensive dress for the engagement for example, have not been in keeping. I would not be surprised if the design of the wedding dress will have to be approved.

Usually the loans are long-term, presumably for life. Generally stuff The Queen hasn't worn for years.

Sophie seems currently also have The Aquamarine Tiara which The Queen last wore 40+ years ago.

They don’t get to pick, it’s up to the whim of The Queen.

"I never realized before what a mess Diana's hair looked like on that day."

The humidity of the day caused her hair to wilt. Her humongous wedding gown (it was pure 80s; too much of everything) didn't fit in the tiny carriage that was used to bring her to the wedding, so it got all crushed and wrinkled. Photos of her seated in her veil and gown show her so buried in fabric that you can hardly see her face. What a mess! Some fairytale!

The marriage turned into a hot mess, too, R87.

Oooh, R85, the aquamarine tiara is stunning! Beautiful design, stunning stones. And it wouldn't flatter Elizabeth or Meghan, the whole royal lot look better in true blues, it should be worn by someone with my auburn hair and blue-green eyes! I MUST have it!

Yeah, I'm a guy. It's that gorgeous.

Just to give you an idea what MM will look like in her tiara.

I think the Queen has the Royal Whomever come over with the jewels he thinks she might want to consider. She picks several selections then allows Meghan to come over and pick something from those selections. OTOH, I guess the Queen could go over to the Tower to the Royal Vault and sit around looking at all her shit for a few hours and decide without the advice of the Royal WTFever.

Could Meg get away with a whomping big tiara with colored stones, if she doesn't wear a lot of other jewelry?

I mean she might as well, the British press are going to criticize her tacky American taste no matter what she wears, so she might as well do whatever she wants.

Is the Queen brought by the royal barge to the Tower to peruse her jewels?

No way should Sparkle wear a tiara. Or wear a white gown. It's her SECOND marriage. To be all decked out in a tiara and white gown would be tacky indeed.

Fergie wore an ivory gown, Megs will probably do the same.

Of course if she really wants to make heads explode, she could wear red!

Meghan has an elven look to her - perhaps the Queen should order a reproduction of Princess Arwen's bridal tiara.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R95 There is actually a royal precedence for wearing a red gown to life's important events.

I can't see the photo at R85 for whatever reason, but the Queen has worn an aquamarine tiara relatively recently, and it was striking next to her white hair.

Here is the perfect tiara for the future Meghan, Duchess of (...)

Also the tiara is in the kokoshnik shape (traditional Russian headdress), and since Meghan is American, and the Russians control our puppet government...

There are several Aquamarine Tiare. Sophie wears 'The Five Aquamarine Tiara' which The Queen hasn't worn since the 1970's

I think that The Queens is called 'The Brazilian Tiara'

AliExpress to th rescue! $14.43!!!!!

The Spencer Tiara looks just like the one given to Anya/Anastasia Romanov by Empress Marie in the Don Bluth movie.

More choices here! Check out the Westminster Halo.

I actually think the Blue Enamel Kokoshnik, or the Cartier Onyx Tree Kokoshnik, would look beautiful on her and give her her own special look without making it seem like she was trying too hard or trying to overshadow someone else.

Another Aquamarine Tiara is 'The Pine Flower' which was a gift from The Queen Mother to Princess Anne when she married.

I don't think that she has worn it for about 40 years though.

R105 R100 here. I am serious about the Cartier onyx tiara as well. It would help accentuate Meghan's smoldering eyes.

Interesting you brought up the aquamarine pine cone tiara R106. Anne dug it out of the vault last year got the Spanish state visit. Can’t remembet the last time I’d seen her wear it. She usually sticks to her Festoon tiara or her Greek Key tiara.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Anne looked like she was rehearsing for the next installment of Reign or Elizabeth I movies.

Regarding the photo at R90, was Meghan Prom Queen or something similar? Rarely does a bitch get elected Prom or Homecoming Queen, so that may show Meghan is nice/cool.

So if the Queen lends a tiara to Sparkle, then when Charles becomes king, Camilla can reclaim any "loaned" jewelry?

I've decided that Meg needs to wear this one, the Faberge "myrtle leaf"! It's lightweight and not as ostentatious as some, appropriate for a young proto-duchess who isn't in the line of succession. But it's also lovely, both bold and delicate, and the gold setting would look fabulous with her dark hair, golden skin tone, and presumably, an ivory gown.

Dang, I had NO idea how much fun it would be to rummage through the queen's jewelry drawer, so to speak. Thanks, OP!

[quote] They don’t get to pick, it’s up to the whim of The Queen.

If the Queen is in the mood to lend jewels she will select a few pieces and then allow the wearer to make her choice from them. She doesn't just open the vault and say "Have at it." In the case of Kate Middleton and the halo tiara, the Queen had a lady-in-waiting write to William's secretary letting him know that she was offering to lend Kate a tiara for the wedding. The Queen never makes such offers personally as it would be embarrassing if the person declined. So, Kate's acceptance was relayed to William's secretary who in turn informed the lady-in-waiting who told the Queen.

Even though Diana was given certain items of heirloom jewelry, she also borrowed from the Queen's collection. Again, there was never any personal interaction between the Queen and Diana about it. It was all handled through ladies-in-waiting.

The aquamarine tiara shown above being worn by $ophie, was not "given", but loaned by the Queen on a per occasion basis. She learned after the failure of the marriage of Charles and Andrew to be very careful of giving out heirloom pieces. Why the Queen bought a tiara for Sarah Ferguson led to speculation that the Queen had her doubts if the marriage would be successful. Princess Margaret warned her sister several times during the engagement that Andrew's marriage would not last.

Fergie's tiara is beautiful, though, no matter the reason behind it.

The diamond on top of Fergie's tiara is a bit too much bling. If I were to wear that tiara, I'd have that rather useless gem removed.

R116, I'm surprised she hasn't had it removed, and sold it.

R117 haha

Bet you ten bucks she's sold the original diamond, and replaced it with a decent fake.

R82 Is the heirloom hairpin included, as well?

Harry ought to have snapped up this little Cartier gem for his future bride.

The hooker actress will probably have the cheek to wear a larger, more 'dazzling' tiara than the one Kate wore.

Thank God Harry is getting more and more irrelevant to the line of succession as Kate keeps popping out little heirs.

[quote]I'm surprised she hasn't had it removed, and sold it.

Then had the rest melted down, and sold that too.

It will be interesting to see if the Queen buys a tiara for Sparkle, rather than lends.

The social climbing slut shouldn't wear a tiara at all. Of course she's trying to get the Spencer tiara - Diana wore it on her wedding day, so the slut wants to wear it, too.

I think Harry ill make sure Meghan has something significant to memorialize his mother, and that the Queen will go all out to show the world that Meghan is a welcome addition to the family. Meghan will do fine.

Imagine Lorelei getting a look at some of these sparklers.

Be sure to watch Dorothy enjoying Lorelei's reaction.

Besides the tiaras in The Queen’s vaults, she also has countless diamond necklaces. Many of these necklaces can work mounted on a framework and work as a tiara. I’ve also seen a cluster of diamond brooches worn as a tiara by Princess Michael, who has two beautiful real tiaras at her use. Personally I’d like to see Meghan in a fringe tiara. The Queen wore a fringe at her wedding and so did Princess Anne and Princess Marina.

Personally I'd like Meghan to fuck off.

I would think that wearing a tiara would draw attention to Meghan's tiny bit of a crossed eye

hmmm

The Royal Sons (who are not in line to the throne) that would be: Andrew, Edward, Harry....get new tiaras that will stay with their line for the women to wear on special occasions.

Sarah's Tiara was purchased. That is now the York Tiara.

Sophie's Tiara was made from elements of Victoria's crown. That is the Wessex Tiara.

Megan will be gifted a tiara also.

Kate was loaned a royal piece because she will become Queen Regnant and never leave the Crown.

QE 2 allowed Kate to choose from 3 options for her wedding tiara. She chose the Halo Tiara. She now often wears the Cambridge Tiara. It is said to be on permanent loan from the queen.

The Spencers also have another tiara Megan can wear. It's known as the Honeysuckle Tiara. Diana wore it a couple of times, but said it was heavy and gave her a headache as the Cambridge Lover's Knot Tiara did.

If the fleur de lys elements could be worn by themselves the second Spencer tiara would look very nice on her. But together with the Greek Key bandeau it’s a hot mess.

The Wessex tiara Sophie wore on her wedding day is absolutely hideous--it is so clearly made from other pieces. Tiaras that have been re-purposed from other jewelry tend to have a telltale "pointy" look to them and are considered slightly tackier than other tiaras (though of course once you become royal you absolutely HAVE to have a tiara for state occasions).

I have no doubt Meghan will be given something from the queen's collection on loan to wear for her wedding. I think after the disasters of Charles' first marriage and Andrew's only marriage it is very unlikely the queen will ever buy a tiara again for someone who is not a blood relative (although the only tiara she ever lost was the one she and Philip gave Sarah Ferguson--and that one will certainly be lent to Beatrice and/or Eugenie if they have need, and willed to them after Fergie dies).

I think it's very unlikely Meghan will wear the Spencer tiaras on her wedding day, since she is not joining the Spencer family: she is joining the Windsor family. She will also almost certainly NOT wear the Cartier halo tiara that Kate Middleton wore on her wedding day so the two will not be compared in the same tiara. I am expecting a very simple one with only diamonds for her wedding: the Queen Mary's fringe tiara that the queen and Anne wore on their wedding days, or the Lotus Flower tiara (pictured), which Kate has worn but still belongs to the queen. Young women are supposed to wear simple jewels, and usually big colored stones (like rubies and sapphires and emeralds) do not look good with wedding dresses.

Meg IS joining the Spencer family just as much as she's joining the royal family.

Surely there is a Markle tiara Meghan can wear?

R135- the Wessex tiara sits too high on her head. You shouldn’t be able to see the bottom frame of the piece. I’m surprised HM hasn’t given Sophie any more piece of jewelry, considering the amount of time she puts in for the crown. Apparently, Sophie and Edward attend every state dinner, not to mention all the other formal occasions, so there would be lots of opportunities to wear some important pieces.

Sorry, r137, but the Markle tiara is out for repair and won't be ready in time. Word is, the yarn has been discontinued and they're having a very hard time matching it.

Megan needs to go full out heritage for her wedding.

Sophie has worn one other Tiara which has been christened 'The Wessex Aquamarine Necklace Tiara' It apparently comes from The Queens collection, but nobody has seen it worn before.

If Megan made friends with Maria Teresa of Luxembourg she could borrow this monstrosity.

Sophie's disastrous wedding tiara was designed by Edward himself from pieces of jewelry from Prince Philip's grandmother, Victoria Milford-Haven and not from Queen Victoria as stated above. QV was VM-H's grandmother so the jewels could have been a gift from Queen Victoria, but they were owned by the Dowager Marchioness.

Poor Edward. He's always attempted to be artsy and creative, but everything turns to shit.

R135 They prefer to buy the brides a tiara instead of gifting them one from the vault.

A new one has no royal pedigree and if there is a divorce there is no historical loss.

And Megan will need one of her own just as Sarah and Sophie had one.

Sophie has now worn 3 or 4 different tiaras. I don't know if they have been gifted to her or if they are on loan.

An Aquamarine 4 or 5 Button Tiara An Aquamarine Center Stone Tiara And I think one more...besides her wedding Tiara

You don't think they will give any "important" jewelry to anyone where there is a chance that the jewelry will go out of the family after a divorce, do you?

Buy a nice, new shiny tiara for the new girls and when the shit hits the fan, nothing important is lost.

The Royal Family has plenty of experience in holding onto stuff.

R146 Exactly. In fact any jewels which belong to the Crown must stay with the Sovereign. It is only what is personally owned by QE2 or Charles that can be given to a 2nd child or a niece...

With the exception of 'The Crown Jewels' (on display at The Tower of London) all of the other jewels & Tiarae are owned personally by The Queen.

They are apparently stored 60ft below Buckingham Palace in a room the size of an ice rink.

The Spencer tiara looked about as good as anything would on Diana on her wedding day given her gigantic oversize Victorian wedding dress. It would have overwhelmed Kate's simpler, sleeker dress had she worn it on her own wedding day, which is why she went for the much simpler Cartier Halo tiara.

Keep in mind that Diana loved big glitzy jewelry and dresses. Kate likes everything understated, from her dresses to her jewels. I am certain she would have chosen to wear Diana's gigantic sapphire engagement ring if it didn't have so many sentimental associations for William

The Faberge "myrtle leaf" would be gorgeous. Of course, there's always Camilla's Cubitt (from her family) or the Greville which she has on "long term loan" from the royals.

Remember when Princess Michael of Kent wore a blackamoor brooch to lunch with Meghan? Maybe she could loan one of her tiaras to try to make up for it. The City of London (with and without additional riviere on top)

The Diamond and Pearl Festoon

She wasn't having lunch with Megan R151. She was trying to convince her to go back to the colonies.

The Fabergé Myrtle Leaf tiara is gorgeous, but there's no way Meghan would ever get the chance to wear it. It's not owned by the Windsors or by the Spencers... it's owned by the Duke of Westminster's family, the Grosvenors. They are unrelated to either the Windsors or the Spencers, so it would be absolutely bizarre if they loaned it to Meghan. It's like saying she would have her weddijng dress loaned to her by Nicole Kidman.

R132, Kate will not be a reigning Queen (like the current Queen Regnant). She will be a Queen Consort, as William will be reigning. She will indeed get all the non-crown jewels though. And i suppose her coronation crown might become a crown jewel, but I’m not sure.

And she’ll get to wear the George IV diadem at least to the coronation and parliament 😁

With her landing this historical engagement/wedding, Sparkle would even wear this, proudly (and The Queen would faint).

R121 He's a cheap f#ck...

[quote] And i suppose her coronation crown might become a crown jewel, but I’m not sure.

All the previous queen consorts since Queen Adelaide have seen their coronation crowns become crown jewels, so there's no reason why Kate (or Camilla, for that matter) should be any different.

The jewels in them will probably be recycled from previous queen's coronation crowns (as the last few were). They likely will not include the famous Koh-i-Noor, diamond, which was in Queen Alexandra's, Queen Mary's, and Queen Elizabeth the Queen mother's crowns, since it is currently disputed and seen as an emblem of British imperialism.

[quote]r128 Personally I’d like to see Meghan in a fringe tiara.

Is this worn on the pubis?

I vote for something more Disneyesque...

" It would be like borrowing someone's underwear."

I would love to see Meghan walking down the aisle wearing underwear on her head.

According to the Collins Dictionary, the plural of tiara in English is indeed tiaras, not tiarae.

I take them as language experts over some cheaply Latin-educated anonymous Datalounger any day. But the rest of you may do as you choose.

She needs something delicate like the The Festoon tiara, which was a gift to Ann

This is my new favorite DL thread. You queens sure know your tiaras!

She can borrow mine

[quote]I would love to see Meghan walking down the aisle wearing underwear on her head.

That ain't nuthin' to joke on, y'all. If she gets all hopped up on Pixy Stix and go-go juice like that time she done snapped up her toosey noots slammin' suitcase #24 shut, it's gon' be underdrawers on her head, tiara glasses all up over her damn wonk-eye, and a bleedin' biscuit with a bite out all over again!

Have I got a scoop for you.

Palace insiders, managed to get a view of the tiara Meghan will be walking down the isle in. In keeping with the style of a humble humanitarian, Miss Markle is keeping it modest, and classy.

I'd much rather be on this thread than on anything that talks about the shooting in Florida or the Mueller investigation, or the Orange Merde in the White House. Unless there's an article on how Melania poisoned him and he died of it, I don't care about him anymore. It's exhausting.

If Melania poisoned President Plump, she'd get a lovely tiara by the entire DL community, that's for sure.

Which of you bitches sent Megan a tiara in the mail and it deteriorated into white powder in transit???

Sparkle needed to "sparkle" for her big day!

!!!BREAKING NEWS!!!

OMG! Supreme Crown Princess HRH Meghan just posted this picture on her secret Instagram! I don't have access so I can't give you an exact quote, but when our mutual friend VixXxen forwarded it to me she said that Supreme Crown Princess HRH Meghan wrote in the Royal Caption that it was a gift directly from the Queen!! Eeeee!

It's called the Lil' Chancer of the West aigrette (WAY more important than a tiara!) and it holds six of the rarest opalescent diamonds in the world! The ring was also from the Queen, making it a parure!

Oh, and before you accuse me of making this up; don't even! My shift starts in ten minutes and I certainly didn't have time to photoshop that tattoo in to trick you.

I suggest this understated little number from Di’s favorite emporium Butler & Wilson.

I add in another vote for the Lotus Tiara. I was checking out tiaras during my breaks all yesterday and today. This is addictive. Who knew there were so many or that noble houses have their own?

" . . . and, my Lady, let us make certain your feathered tiara has the appropriate complement . . . "

R174. I think many DLers have been imagining and choosing their tiaras for years before they've had a chance to chat about tiaras here on DL. Some of us (ahem) may have even constructed our own, from tinfoil adorned with various pretty things.

Kate already wore the Papyrus tiara at least once, so I’d hate for the rabid Kate fans to accuse Meghan of elbowing in. Of course, Kate doesn’t OWN it, The Queen does. It’s a very nice tiara though. I liked when the Queen Mother wore it as a young royal duchess, fashionably low on the forehead.

^^^ I meant Lotus, not papyrus.

Harry only has to say the word and his father will design a tiara incorporating deeply meaningful elements. As you can see, he did a wonderful job on mine!

Fun fact: in ancient Greek and Latin "tiara" originally meant a soft cloth hat with ear flaps. Typically represented as worn by royalty, however, which accounts for the shift in reference.

Best thread since the Disney princess list by rank thread.

The Strathmore Rose might be in consideration - it has two different frames, one to wear low, one to wear top of the head.

Hmmm

She could borrow the Teck Crescent from Viscount Linley!

I love big Mary Adelaide!

Princess Mary Adelaide was known as "Fat Mary." She was QEII's great-grandmother.

The story, R151 .... what "Blackamoor brooch"?

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The comments on the blog linked at R183 is frightening.

surfer girl7 January 2018 at 00:01 "👸🏻 I can see Meghan wearing the Queen's Fringe Tiara. It would make the boldest statement of support in my opinion and it fits Meghan's style. Imagine wearing the same tiara that the Queen wore for her wedding. And that thing does sparkle for sure. :) Second possibility to me is the Vladimir Tiara with either the pearls (to help bring Diana to remembrance as it resembles the tiara Kate wears) OR better yet, with the emeralds that would look lovely on Meghan, very lovely, and would still reference Diana via the similarity to the Cambridge Lovers' Knot tiara. Win win on both points with that one. Can't you just picture Meghan in diamonds and emeralds? perfect. My third option would be a new tiara for her with Harry using loose stones or stones from existent pieces of Diana's and designing it for her or with her. Can you imagine how fun that would be? I think Harry designing it with Meghan would be more like it, yeh? Either way, with the unique style of their engagement photos and Meghan not being shy about wearing a beautiful $75,000 gown for that, I think Meghan will not hold back and will have exactly the style and wedding she has always wanted. It will be perfect. I am SO excited but maintaining patience, lol. (I know, lol. surprise of surprises.)"

Good god that is a frightening insight into the frenzied mind of a crazed stan r190.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The post at r190 is hilariously insane. I'm only surprised the fangurl didn't suggest Meghan wear the Imperial Crown of State.

It's lovely, absolutely lovely -

R194, it is "Georgina," dear -

"I think Meghan will not hold back and will have exactly the style and wedding she has always wanted. "

You know, since the British are going to call her a tasteless arriviste piece of vulgar colonial trash no matter what she does, she might as well.

To be fair r196 she IS a tasteless arriviste vulgarian.

[quote] "I think Meghan will not hold back and will have exactly the style and wedding she has always wanted. "

As if.

The Palace has the last word on these ceremonies.

If Sparkle had her way, the wedding would be in Westminster Abbey and she'd get to ride through the streets of London, waving and blowing kisses.

That's not happening, is it?

I wouldn't want some damn borrowed tiara if I was marrying into that disgustingly rich family.

I mean, what is this...[italic]a joke?[/italic] Don't you fucking poor-mouth me!

But back on topic: She doesn't seem like the classic type, so one of the ones resembling flowers would probably suit her style best, by default. (This one's Danish...but they must have one like that gathering dust, somewhere.)

I'd like this Danish one, but in platinum. Just break with tradition and give all the big, honking stones a rest.

Ooh, lovely, R200! At least when you're close enough to see the detail.

This one came up on the "ugly tiara" thread but I like it a lot, Princess Charlotte of Monaco's "seafoam" tiara. It can be worn as a modernistic tiara...

I'm sure there must be hundreds of loose rubies and emeralds around. What about a gigantic watermelon tiara?

Or split, with half worn as a single spray in the hair. I like that.

Yes, r180, contrary to what was posted early in the thread, tiara was originally a Greek word, not Latin, meaning the headdress of the Persian kings. It passed into English first from Latin and then partly through Italian.

And again contrary to posts above, if you consult any English dictionary, the correct plural in English is only tiaras and the first definition given is always the three-tiered Papal Crown, which is vaguely similar to the Persian headdress. Wikipedia says the Papal Crown hasn't been used since the 1960s but that doesn't explain the image below. A google image search gives many fascinating and beautiful examples.

R204 [italic]I think we have a winner![/italic]

You want ugly papal crowns? Here's an ugly papal crown!

It makes those Persian multicolored horrors look tasteful.

I can see it with a matching cake.

Now I'm pushing for a [italic]Game of Thrones[/italic] look....

She should wear vintage Vivian Westwood and any old tiara borrowed from a MIss Trans Universe

I really like the Teck Crescent, and agree with the poster upthread who said she should go with something dainty and floral, like the Papyrus/Lotus piece. I hope she really gets to break something special out of the vault that we haven't seen in years. It would be a sweet gesture by the Queen and I know she really wants Harry to be happy.

Teck Crescent belongs to HM as far as I’ve ever read, not Viscount Linley/Earl of Snowdon. All of important pieces of The Queen Mother’s jewels went to Queen Elizabeth. As Charles was the QMs most beloved grandson, and since Charles is the throne heir, he gets to use some the jewels for his wife Camilla. Others were snatched for exclusive use by Queen Elizabeth, especially pieces that were originally Queen Victoria’s. An impressive ruby necklace in particular, plus a ruby tiara.

This one is a beauty and I admired it first when I saw the Queen wearing it. I don't think they'd want red for the wedding, but you never know.

R203, I actually like this idea. It's very modern yet it accommodates the need for adornment. It's a tiara but it isn't. So if Meghan goes for something like this especially made for her using stones from the vault, I'd be good with that.

They will likely do something like this, R213. The Family doesn't like to allow historic pieces to get lost in potential divorces. If I'm correct, Diana was given a tiara for a wedding gift that she later returned when she ended her marriage to Charles. I'm not sure if she was asked to do it, whether it was always considered a loan, or if Diana just gave it back to follow tradition. Maybe someone more connected in GB knows?

Victoria's Emerald and Diamond Tiara would be lovely. It's not been seen in many years since an exhibition in the 90's. I really like the simplicity and formality of this piece.

They could take out the big emeralds and put in smaller, but still big, diamonds. It would be stunning on Meghan and still have a lot of historical significance.

They could even just take out the emeralds, period and it would look fabulous. Simple, elegant, modern. Albert really did have wonderful taste in jewels.

Queen Victoria's Emerald and Diamond tiara may have been sold after Princess Margaret died. It was never revealed which descendant of Victoria's had it, but it was rumored to have been sold and dismantled.

I believe the emerald and diamond wound up with the descendants of Princess Mary, Queen Mary’s daughter. Her son had to sell it, I saw it on exhibition in NYC.

The emeralds probably got brittle. Too bad, it was lovely.

[quote] The emeralds probably got brittle.

Not so.

[quote]And don't believe that story about the emerald being brittle. Emeralds, by nature, have fissures running through them. Some are weakened by these and can break. (You can see some running through the two loose emeralds above). But a good quality emerald will wear a long time...as long as you are not pouring concrete or framing houses or something while wearing them. But some of the cheap quality emeralds sold by discount stores will break fairly easily due to their being....cheap quality.

If I'm not mistaken, I believe Diana's jewels were addressed during the divorce negotiations. Some pieces were returned, some were hers to use during her lifetime and obviously she had many pieces that were outright gifts and hers to do as she pleased.

Well whatever she had Diana had to have left something for her boys. I'm sure Charles would have had the very best negotiators to insist his sons got what they deserved before the Spensers got anything.

Sophie's Wessex Aquamarine tiara is beautiful, and looks even better as a necklace. The giant aqauamrine at the center looks beautiful on a woman with her coloring.

A million American gay men learned (wrongly) to turn their noses up at semi-precious stones from Aunt Alicia's advice to Leslie Caron in "Gigi."but actually pale-colored semi-precious stones can look better than precious stones (except for diamonds and pearls) because they work better with most women's skin tones. A courtesan like Aunt Alicia would not care for semi-precious stones because they don;t have the resale value of precious stones, but they're nevertheless often favored by actual aristocrats who are not so financially embarrassed.

The queen seems to have been given a ton of beautiful aquamarines years ago by the Brazilian government and still does not know what to do with them all (despite the gigantic tiara and parure she had made of them). I assume the Wessex Aquamarine Tiara came from them.

What's this tiara called? There are several pictures of Princess Anne wearing it and it's quite lovely.

I must say, Anne cleans up nicely, for someone who'd rather be mucking out the stables.

R225 it’s the festoon tiara.

Here's a page on it too

I think the Festoon may be my favorite. Very regal and feminine. Anne wore it well, too.

She got it for free too. All she had to do was christen a ship. Can you imagine?

The Festoon Tiara is perfect with Anne's big "tiara hair." It's not overwhelming, but the points of it really show up against the background of her hair.

Thanks, R189

I want the WINDSOR KNOT tiara and I want it NOW!

This magnificent tiara is perhaps the oldest in the world. It was made 2,500 years ago in ancient Greece.

Here you go, r232. It's full of knots and the DHL delivery van will be passing through Windsor on the A332.

Kind of fun video. Catherine wearing some of Diana's jewels.

Is this lovely piece available via FedEx/DHL?

[quote] Catherine wearing some of Diana's jewels.

The Cambridge Lover's Knot tiara was never really part of "Diana's jewels,"" despite what the video says. They were the queen's jewels that the queen let Diana wear as long as she was married to Charles (the proof that she did not really give it to Diana permanently was that Diana returned it when she and Charles divorced). Now the queen is letting Catherine wear it, but it is not Catherine's to give away until she herself becomes queen consort.

I’ll say it. That engagement ring is drab. It’s big but it’s so blah.

R238, It ain't about the silly ring!

(My wedding ring was made of tinfoil.)

Diana’s ring doesn’t look nice on Catherine.

William (Charles) negotiated for Diana's engagement ring for Kate, trading it for the Spencer Tiara for Harry's bride.

r241, you're talking completely out of your ass. You know nothing.

William and Henry do not own the tiara, and neither ever did Diana. It is the property of the Spencer family, which was headed by Diana's father when she married Charles, and is now headed by her brother, Charles, Earl Spencer. He owns the tiara: William and Harry do not.

Diana DID own the sapphire and diamond engagement ring, and willed it to her sons. They decided whoever got engaged first could give it to his fiancee.

Princess Diana's tiara is probably cursed.

Reportedly, Diana did not like wearing the Lover's Knot tiara as the pearls knocked against the frame and it was heavy.

I don't think Harry or William have much to do with the Spencers. You never see them with their aunts, uncle or cousins.

It was never hers r243. On long term loan from the royal collection.

This is a big beautiful one that disappeared into someone's collection. If you scroll down on the page, there's a fabulous ruby ring worth taking a look at. This family had some amazing taste and money. Do you think the Queen will give Harry and Meghan a title that could line up with some obscure tiara in the collection, or have one created for the title? Is that what they've done with the Wessex tiara?

You never know, Meghan might not even wear a tiara. British toyal brides didn’t always, it started around the time of the marriage of Princess Marina. Prior to that it was usually little arrangements of orange blossoms and myrtle.

Isn't myrtle essential in all royal bouquets? I forgot the reason why. Thanks, R248.

R 241. The Spencer tiara belongs to the Earl of Spencer. It never belonged to Diana. Consequently, your post in totally in error.

Well, I want the Spencer Tiara and Harry's going to get it for me. I think I'll wear it for the Vanity Fair cover story after the wedding.

The Spencer tiara isn't all that. Sparkle might end up with something grander.

I think Harry should wear the Spencer tiara and shock the world.

I think the myrtle tradition goes back to antiquity, it was sacred to a Greek goddess, forgot which one. I know Queen Victoria had some in her bridal bouquet or headdress and they managed to root it and it gradually grew to become a shrub that exists to this day on one of their estates.

Myrtle was sacred to Aphrodite. It represents beauty,love, and desire.

Queen Victoria's garden of myrtle

I'm guessing this is why Myrtle became a popular Victorian name.

Earl Spencer could loan it, but after his insulting speech at the funeral, the Royal Family wouldn’t want him at the wedding.

My favorite in the Queen's collection is the Girls of Great Britain and Ireland Tiara.

^^^her favorite, so its never leaving her blue bony hands until she’s dead.

It will be nice to see it on Queen Camilla. I’d like to see the original upright pearls restored though.

What are the odds that Meg won't want to wear a tiara at all, R248?

Considering that she wanted a $75K gown for one photo shoot, which was BTW hideous, I put the odds at ten billion to one against.

I want this one Harry! Get it for me now!

That engagement photo dress was so tacky. It looked like something you would've seen on Dynasty in the 80s. Also, it was totally inappropriate for daytime.

True, R263, those pictures are ridiculous.

Harry is wearing a nice suit and tie, suitable for daytime, and she's wearing a formal gown which should never be worn while the sun is up - an ugly formal gown. If that's any indication of her taste level, we're in for a very entertaining wedding!

I said “might” but I agree, it seems like if she’s going to marry a prince she’s going to go full bling. The minimal statement of wearing a floral headdress would be lost on everyone. She can’t win anyway, her detractors (which includes about 95% of DL, British or not) would say she was trying for false modesty/humble brag for not wearing a diamond tiara.

Anyway, if flat-ass Pippa can wear a diamond tiara then so can anyone.

Y'all know Meghan's been braiding one of these beauties since she was 6.

Do not listen to these peasants, Meghan. Even I wore a glorious tiara for my wedding, Dahling.

Anybody got any pics of what she wore at her first wedding?

R268, more than likely, she blew her first Big Day it in a "Slip Dress."

Meghan, call me. I know the designer.

R268 this is her first wedding dress: strapless, low cut and a glittery belt. Looks cheap to me (in every sense) but maybe the DL fashion mavens can elaborate.

There are no black people in the picture at R271.

I've read that Kate initially didn't want to wear a tiara, only flowers in her hair. She had to be talked into it. Or ordered.

Kate is notoriously known for being a Passive-Aggressor. It's how she'd won Wills.

R271 Her first wedding was on a beach, she's hardly going to wear Vera Wang ankle deep in sand.

^^^Why not? Lots of other people do.

It looks cheap. She’d have been better with a white cotton beach dress. That sparkly thing looks like polyester.

No jewelry at all?

[quote]Earl Spencer could loan it, but after his insulting speech at the funeral, the Royal Family wouldn’t want him at the wedding.

That didn't stop him from attending Will and Kate's wedding, and if I recall correctly, both Harry and William greeted him very warmly. Also, after the funeral speech, the princes gave their uncle a standing ovation.

This tramp is dressing up to the nines for her re-marriage? Tacky and classless to the end.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

This thread is turning into another Sparkle thread. This being said, she'll have an 'anchor baby' within two years; then she's out.

Oops. I forgot about Daily Mail's links not working. For the sake of clarity....

[quote]'Come and read about the girl with the magical boobs': Meghan Markle's secret diary revealed as she is exposed as the anonymous author of a soul-baring blog in which she described herself as a struggling actress 'hustling' to reach stardom

[quote]Rather bravely, we might think, she continued with her racy confessions. ‘Come and read about the girl with the magical boobs!’ she teased readers in a tweet in February 2011.

[quote]Another Twitter plug for her diary, two months later, was equally cheeky: ‘Come and read about sex. Lots of sex! (I swear my Twitter account wasn’t hacked).’

If a truly smelly whore like Camilla can join the family, why not Sparkle? At least she wears a bra that fits and doesn't chain smoke.

Prince Harry smokes like a chimney, has done since he was young.

Back to the tiaras!

Cammie fucked her husband and Chuck r283 unlike Di who’s MO was to stalk, harass, threaten or otherwise terrorize the wives of the many married men she fucked on the regular. Cammie may not be to your liking but she’s not a psycho whore like Di.

I read Charles' biography recently and Cammie came off very well. I know that of course she would be expected to get positive treatment, but from the way they described her as a very young woman, and leading up to now, she is very easy going, loves her horses, and has always been fun loving and down to earth. People talked about her warmth and her sense of humor. She seems like a basically happy person.

Regarding Meg's first wedding dress at R271:

If anything, it's TOO fancy and formal for a beach wedding where people are wearing tropical-print sundresses and dancing barefoot on the sand. It's pretty enough and it fits, and if it's too long in that picture it's probably because she took off the high heels she wore at the actual ceremony.

It's the bridesmaids' dresses that are hideous, they look like frilled wine bags.

So, having looked at the link at R280, I am reminded and must ask:

What happened to her two dogs?

One she left behind for some questionable reason and the other ended up with two broken legs.

Any updates?

Harry should sleep with one eye open after the nuptials.

Isn't that the Cambridge Love Knot tiara, a not-so favorite of Diana's? It looks horrible on Wallis. But to be fair, much of everything looked horrible on Wallis. She looked like a rusty coat hanger.

R290 you’re right, Wallis was the epitome of a British expression I love : “face like a bag of spanners” (spanners are wrenches). It’s such an evocative phrase, really conjures up the image.

That picture of Wallis Simpson woth the tiara is photoshopped. The Queen Mother never liked her and I doibt she would lend her that tiara.

Wallis only wore a tiara twice. Once was a loaner that she was required to wear when being presented to King George V and Queen Mary. The other was her personal property, it was a chic little bandeau of emerald beads and diamonds. It could be worn as a necklace or a tiara, and even as a tiara it looked more high fashion than royal. I think she wore it to a single occasion because it went with her outfit because otherwise she wasn’t known for trying to dress like a traditional noblewoman in a diamond tiara.

The Duchess of Windsor's Emerald Bead Tiara

I can’t get over Lady Di’s expression in OP’s gif.

She’s got this incredible tiny smirk that says, “I can’t believe these fools fell for it...”. She’s ICONIC.

R294, I don't really like those emerald beads and they seem out of place in a tiara. If you scroll down in your link, you come to this tiara, either citrine or topaz. Can't decide whether I like it or not, though the brunette wears it and the matching earrings well. Hard to carry off this color if you're a blonde or grey.

I thought Queen Mary adamantly refused to meet Wallis.

When was the encounter between Wallis and George V & Queen Mary?

I like that r296 but it would look better IMHO with a Cairngorm, much deeper, warmer color ranging from deep yellows, mellow oranges to fiery reds. Cairngorm is a rare variety of smoky quartz only found in the Cairngorm mountains of Scotland : all Cairngorms are smoky quartz but not all smoky quartz is a Cairngorm. I love the depth of color, it’s like faceted honey.

If we lived in more “peacock” times I would have this stone on a watch fob.

Prince Albert apparently owned one very much like it, R298

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

I'm not R293, but maybe they are talking about this event: "At the only meeting between the two women for more than 30 years – the unveiling of a plaque to Queen Mary in 1967 – Wallis pointedly omitted to curtsey to the Queen Mother" But maybe they are confused about the Queen Mother at the time, I'm not sure

Very nice r299/r300. They’re really expensive now compared to other quartzes. I read a bit about why they’re so rare and it just comes down to they’re not mined because 1. it’s solid granite and 2. it’s a national park so all finds are just on the surface.

r287 But they skipped the part where she is a cunning, manipulative homewrecker and pretentious snob without a drop of aristocratic blood in her veins.

r303 I take part of it back. Her grandfather was a baron. Almost the lowest aristocratic title on England's aristocratic totem pole.

And you skipped the part where Di was a cunning, manipulative homewrecker descended from a sheep trader and she was a devious, malicious stalker who terrorized the wives of the many, many married men she fucked r303.

When she gave that cringingly embarrassing interview whining about “three in this marriage” why didn’t she mention herself being the third unwanted wheel in about eight other marriages? Why no mention of her making LITERALLY hundreds of silent phone calls to the home of Oliver Hoare?

The difference is that Charles never quit seeing Camilla- ever. Diana didn't start any affairs until she'd finally had enough of him and the Rottweiler.

That is completely untrue r306 but even if it was do you think that makes it OK for Di to be an even bigger homewrecker with added psycho stalker?

R305 the only people I read Diana was involved in were single. I’m thinking of the Pakistani doctor and the guy who people think is Prince Harry’s father (sorry too lazy to Google). There were a few others but where do you get the “many, many”? Who else was she involved with?

Wallis didn’t meet George V and Mary, she was merely ‘presented’ to them along with dozens of other women. The ladies wore tiara, long gown, gloves, and ostrich feathers. Their name would be announced, the lady would do a deep curtsy, and the king and Queen would nod back. That’s all, yet it what the highlight of any woman’s social life back then

Oliver Hoare. Will Carling. Barry Mannakee. Theodore Forstmann. James Gilbey. David Waterhouse. Some married, others either engaged or in long term relationships. Fucked them all while married and snivelling about it.

Diana's affairs with/harrassing of married men is well-known.

Yeah, R309, being "presented" to the king and queen of England was the social apex of the early 20th century.

Rose Kennedy and her daughters were presented when evil Joe Kennedy was made ambassador to England in the 1930s, and Rose had a gown made for the occasion. She considered it her best and grandest gown, and the time she ever wore it again was when her son was inaugurated as president of the United States and threw a ball to celebrate. Yes, being presented to the king or queen along with a horde of other women was THAT big a deal!

[quote] When was the encounter between Wallis and George V & Queen Mary?

It was at the ball for George V's Silver Jubilee in 1935, the year before he died. Wallis was already dating David (as his parents knew), and finagled an invitation with society staple Emerald Cunard to the ball as David's guest. David presented Wallis to his father, who was livid about it, and who told his wife and daughter later that night, "I met that BITCH today!"

Another classic DL thread right up their with Mamie Eisenhower's low hangers.

I wonder how many of the tiaras, necklaces, rings, etc. that reside in the vault 60 ft. below Buckingham have never been seen by the public or the Queen herself is not aware of or has forgotten about.

It's almost criminal that Sophie got that POS tiara (which one of the blogs reported was designed by Garrard, not Edward who designed the the even more hideous and out-of-place necklace she wore). Even Fergie received a nicer, new one purchased from the royal jeweler. Maybe such a tiara was seen as appropriate for the daughter of a tire salesman. Ironic that she turned into the most stalwart daughter-in-law in the bunch.

The Faberge Cyclamen tiara is the most exquisite

r305 r310 r311 are total fucking cunts and part of that fugly bitch's PR staff.

I agree with you about the Cyclamen tiara. I like it most of all. In fact, the Westminster collection of tiaras is amazing and rivals the Queen's. Unfortunately, it belongs to them and not her. No Cyclamen tiara for Meg unless they buy it for her. As Harry's fiance, I think Her Majesty will do her justice in the jewelry department.

Oh give it a fuckng rest r315. You’re stanning over a dead psycho whore.

You're both tedious, R315 and R317. This is a thread about what is worn on the head, not what the pussy is up to. Cunts.

Oooh, I love the Cyclamen Tiara also! But the only thing I wish... I feel like it should be more symmetrical. I want it to have the Cyclamen facing each other toward the middle, like the wheat tiaras do. Is that weird, is that wrong, are my design instincts bad? It also creeps me out when earrings don't have a clear right and left mirror image of each other.

No, that's a nice design idea, R319. I think the central cyclamen is bigger than the rest. It also drives me crazy re: earrings mirrored on either side.

Since DL fave Mamie Eisenhower was mentioned, I thought I'd post a picture of her in all her frumpy glory with the Queen. I don't know which tiara the Queen is wearing here, but it's lovely.

Amazing to think that Princess Elizabeth became Queen Elizabeth when Harry Truman was president, and she's still reigning!

She still knew enough to wear the proper attire, R321, and not try to upstage the Queen. No, she wasn't a looker, but neither was Dwight.

And which First Lady would you be referring to who tried to upstage Queen Elizabeth? Something tells me you’re not going to say Nancy Reagan though.

R97 Thanks for that link, it's fascinating. Here's a memorable quote from the article

In the words of her late sister, Princess Margaret: ‘The Queen is the only person who can put on a tiara with one hand, while walking down stairs.’

The cyclamen tiara is lovely just the way it is!

But yeah, Sophie is the only one of the queen's daughters-in-law who's never caused any scandal or trouble. The queen should loan her something nice, she's got a fucking underground bunker full of the stuff!

Of course Sophie has caused no trouble. She knew the arrangement beforehand. Pop out a couple kids and let Queen Edward do his thing.

Didn't know the Earl Spencer has been married three times. What a moron. He's actually written a few articles about how Earls like him manage their estates in today's financially straitened times. He talked about how common it is for aristocrats who've inherited the castle/grounds to marry some wealthy woman from Pasadena, he hinted that when he got a tour of Althorp from Raine, a lot of stuff was missing that should have been chattel (attached to the house, not sold off by her for $$$). Of course he wanted it to sell off. He just went through the whole "Downton Abby in the 21st Century" schtick about taxes, how the homes are a money suck, etc. And all along he married three times and let his personal finances become a mess? He always acted like it was just how it was for all landed aristocrats.

[quote]"At the only meeting between the two women for more than 30 years – the unveiling of a plaque to Queen Mary in 1967 – Wallis pointedly omitted to curtsey to the Queen Mother"

Technically speaking, she would not have been in breach of etiquette.

Americans do not have to curtsy nor bow to royals.

Even Miss Manners says Americans do not have to and indeed SHOULD NOT bow to royalty:

[quote] Dear Miss Manners: In regard to Americans bowing to royalty, I firmly agree with you that bowing in subservience to another person is out of the question. (I would assume that a bow to a Japanese person is different, since both parties bow as a sign of respect.) But what would be the protocol if one were to meet Queen Elizabeth in England? Would the circumstances change if the visit was at her palace vs. a public venue? I have no plans to meet any royalty anytime soon, but I am curious as to how it would be handled.

[quote] Gentle Reader: Unless, heaven forbid, you are an envoy of the U.S. government who has been sent to deliver a retroactive surrender to our former British rulers, you should not pay obeisance to the queen. We fought hard not to have to do so. Why give in now? The next thing we knew, she’d be taxing our tea and impressing our sailors. Miss Manners assures you that the British have now accepted the loss of their American colonies with good grace and do not expect Americans to kneel to their queen anywhere.

I want this one or myself. Simple, tasteful, elegant design, with just one carved emerald the size of a fucking hockey puck for a splash of color.

Didn't he fuck Katharine Hepburn? Oh wait, that was The Spencer Tracy.

That is a gorgeous tiara, R330!

R331 should add his to the thread called "The ugliest tiaras."

r327 Princess Diana and one of her sisters, maybe Jane, actually 'broke into' Althorp by climbing through a window and managed to save a few family heirlooms when their step-mother, Raine, was selling off the family 'chattel.'

All these modular tiaras, that convert to necklaces or brooches, are really intriguing. I keep expecting James Bond's 'M' to appear and explain how a tiara converts to a revolver/camera or has a secret compartment with a ricin pellet and blowpipe.

Is Sophie a lez-lez? No judgment but those two are bearding, right?

r335 I've always thought so. It was "turkey baster night" on more than a few occasions in that household, but only when they needed to procreate.

Well I hope Sophie is happy and has some fun on the side. They do seem to get along and hopefully they provide a stable family life for those kids. Two parents with “an arrangement” amid homosexual proclivities that would preclude a “new model” (or an old one, in the case of Camilla) disrupting things is probably better than the shitshows the Wales and York children grew up with.

Wallis did curtsey to the Queen, just not snaggletoothed and bald (and probably gin-breathed) Queen Mother.

[quote] But yeah, Sophie is the only one of the queen's daughters-in-law who's never caused any scandal or trouble.

WRONG! She was the first one to get caught up in a sting by the News of The World undercover reporter (dressed as a fake sheikh) . She was basically trying to give access to the Queen for any clients that signed on with her public relations company. Skip about a decade ahead and Fergie gets caught doing the same type of thing by the same exact reporter (dressed like a sheikh)

The difference between Sophie and Sarah is that Sophie was contrite, embarrassed and ashamed. She also learned her lesson from that mistake. She stays in the background and doesn't try to get any extra attention. Sarah Ferguson could learn a lot from Sophie

I'd forgotten about that sheikh incident. She was also taped or photographed screaming and berating her royal protection officer on busy street.

r339 Ha! What a couple of dummies.

I've searched for a picture of the cyclamen tiara actually worn to get a better sense of its dimensions, but I cannot find one. Very odd.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

I hope she wears it. I think it will give a nice touch of fond coziness and it would be a spectacular match for the sort of simple gown I imagine she'd favor.

Am I the only one who sees photos of Princess Diana from the 80's and 90's -- era fashion and all -- and think "Mommy"? It's amazing how certain people and images can be imprinted upon your childhood. There's just so many positive, subliminal feelings I associate with this woman.

[quote]Am I the only one who sees photos of Princess Diana from the 80's and 90's -- era fashion and all -- and think "Mommy"?

Uh, probably? I’m not even sure what you mean. Were you a child when she was famous? Did your own mother dress like her? She’s not thought of as matronly, and she died at 36, so I don’t think most people have that association.

R345 Yes, I was a child when she was on magazines and everywhere in pop culture, so it's probably something subconscious.

Ahem - Shall we continue this discussion, as the Royal Wedding is exactly two weeks from today -

Since we've last conversed on this topic, it appears Sparkle has narrowed her choices of tiaras for her big day to one of four royal tiaras, one of which is the Spencer Tiara.

The Spencer Tiara will reappear after all.

^ . . . has narrowed her choice of tiaras for her big day to one of four royal tiaras . . .

I’m looking forward to the wedding. My partner is a Brit and hates the monarchy, he thinks I’m nuts. But I’ll have you bitches to watch it with!

It will be amusing if Markle uses Diana's tiara. I also read that the church was going to be full of the roses Diana loved so much.

It will be a constant reminder to the ugly Rottweiler of who these children are and belong to.

Pardonnez-moi , Gurls -

The Royal Wedding is mere hours, mere hours, away! Time to resume discussion of Sparkle and The Spencer Tiara!

Meghan's mother will be wearing the Spencer tiara.

It would be appropriate for the bride to marry wearing the groom's mother's tiara ..... as Princess Charlotte could, wear her grandmother's..

People go back and read the thread. The Spencer tiara is only worn by SPENCER females, like Diana and her sisters. The ones born into the family, not marrying into it. Earl Spencer will likely not make an exception to this, and he owns the tiara.

There are a ton of tiaras the Brit Royal family has for her to use. Or Harry, Charles or the Queen could create a new one as an early wedding gift like they did for Sophie, Edward's wife. Or purchase her one for her own use, as I think they did for Fergie when she married Andrew.

Watching BBC America all day today, and I am struck by how beautiful Diana looked in the tiara and veil.

I don't think I really grasped how lovely she was when the wedding was occurring. Perhaps because I was her age, and I imagined all women to be extraordinarily lovely.

Charles & Diana's wedding was a spectacle and I enjoyed every minute of it, but I honestly could not get past Diana's wedding gown. it was just too awful, IMO Much too much Muchness.

[quote] Or Harry, Charles or the Queen could create a new one

Don't you think the Queen has enough to do without having to sit down and glue jewels on a crown? Let Princess Michael of Kent do it.

A denied request for The Spencer Tiara? Not to fear . . . a little cardboard; some talented, slim little fingers; and an endless imagination - She'll be fine.

This will end in tiaras.

I have a spare tiara she can wear. Slightly used.

[quote]I am struck by how beautiful Diana looked in the tiara and veil.

Didn’t she? Of course she had youth on her side and that fabulous complexion. I was in love with her look, she started wearing all those cute little hats after her marriage.

[quote]It will be amusing if Markle uses Diana's tiara. I also read that the church was going to be full of the roses Diana loved so much.

I don't think guys usually like it when you dress like their mom....creepy.

Diana looked terrible on her wedding day, buried under that humongous veil and that monstrosity of a dress. Her hair also looked bad, wilting in the heat of the day. And what's with the "roses Diana loved so much." I heard her favorite flowers were lilies of the valley. They were the flowers used to blanket her coffin.

r362 I thought it was creepy that Will gave Kate his mother's ring since she was killed so young. Every time I saw her after she got the ring I got the distinct vibe that she thought it was creepy too and was not happy about it.

[quote]Diana looked terrible on her wedding day, buried under that humongous veil and that monstrosity of a dress.

I agree. That dress looked like the designer just went to a close-out lace store and bought up everything they had and built the dress, veil and train out too much fabric. Rather than going for something stylish, Diana chose as much as she could carry on her back. It wasn't pretty, it was gauche.

Given that the wedding ceremony symbolizes the bride leaving her family of origin and becoming a member of a new family, it's appropriate for the bride to wear the tiara that belongs to her own family.

Diane wanted a "fairytale" wedding dress. It was the 80s, and the motto back then was "more is more." So that dress had more of everything: lace, taffeta, satin, pearls, sequins, lace, with a freaking 25 foot train. The fairytale dress and train got crushed in the tiny carriage in which Diana was transported. That dress was such a mistake.

Diana was a member of the aristocracy marrying the heir to the British throne. The dress was perfectly appropriate and made a statement. Would you prefer that she had worn a sleeveless mermaid dress?

Since Harry helped design the engagement ring I have a feeling he has helped design her own tiara. Didn't Edward do that for Sophie?

Oh please, most early 80s wedding dresses were much more hideous than Diana's! Sure, the crumpling fabric was a mistake, but the cut was pretty enough, with no dropped waist or bubble skirt, and the decorations subtle for the period.

This is a more typical gown from the period, featuring the huge veil that everyone hates now, and every available surface being covered with lace, fake pearls, rhinestones, bits of sheer fabric, embroidery, and fuckery.

Really, would you rather Diana wore something like this horror?

Yeah, Diana's dress was OTT but it was the 80s- the OTT decade- and Di was tall and had the presence to pull it off.

Charles Spencer has 5 daughters. He may want the Spencer tiara reserved specifically for their use, you know, as actual Spencers.

We'll see.

Charles Spencer owes so much in alimony and child support I bet he has to sell the damn tiara to support his multiple ex wives and their spawn. I wouldn't be surprised if one day he starts renting it out for weddings.

R373, do you think that he'll "loan" it to Meghan for a consideration, or would letting her use it be bad for future rental business?

The folks that would pay to rent out that tiara would be the following

Persians like the folks from the Shahs of Sunset Strip

Cast members from Geordie Shore/The Only Way is Essex

Travellers

Russian escorts

Social climbers from the Middle East/Pakistan/India/Nigeria

So no, Meghan wearing the tiara would only add to its rental value

I forgot the number 1 group that would fight over that tiara rental:

WAGS

." The dress was perfectly appropriate and made a statement/"

I guess the statement was "Look at me! My fairy tale gown has everything and then some! The biggest train! The biggest veil! And sequins, more sequins and pearls and ribbons and lace and taffeta and satin! It has MORE of everything! LOOK AT ME!" Typical 80s bad taste. Typical 80s excess.

I thought it was silk?

Lillies of the valley are poisonous.

Diana's dress, veil and huge bouquet were very 80s. In fact, since it was only 1981, it was likely seen as very fashion forward, coming in huge contrast to the simple hippie/prairie style wedding dresses from the 70s. This was Princess Anne's gown from 1973:

Princess Caroline from 1978:

And Princess Michael from 1975 (sans brooch):

Make sure you come visit us for all your bridal wear and accessories, remember we are "Embroidery and Fuckery" open Monday through Saturday.

That's Embrodery and Fuckery at the corner of Mesa and Montana, we'll help you make your day extra special!

Di's wedding dress wasn't downright BAD, but it's not something to beto really look back on with pride, either. It's weird because while it's relatively simple, it's also BIG. Kind of like her.

(It looks better without the detachable train, anyway...which just adds bulk upon bulk.) (There's still plenty to hate about it, tho...that horrible neck ruffle, the ridiculous sleeves...)

It looked so much better on her. Now I understand all the milkmaid complaints.

Wow, R379, Princess Anne's gown was really very beautiful! Simple, classic elegance, much better than Diana's overdone gown.

Anne really does clean up well, on the rare occasion she chooses to leave the stables.

All right, Tiara Geeks! Tell us all about the lovely non-Spencer tiara Meghan actually wore, and its history and who loaned it to her.

It is lovely, and BTW I absolutely loved her gown. Simple elegance, and she even knew not to wear a necklace! It would have been too much, with five pounds of diamonds on her head.

People has a nice write up on it.

The Queen sat up for three days straight gluing all that tat on her headband.

It's gorgeous and looked great on her.

According to [italic]Elle[/italic], the 25 best royal tiara moments:

R390- I was hoping for a better article. It was pretty much just a collection of pictures of Diana and the Queen in tiaras. Nothing special 😕