Windsor Jewels Pt 7

[Eric_Lowe]

Queen Mary had so many jewels (from both Queen Victoria & Queen Alexandra, not to mention those she herself received and commissioned), it is hard to be 100% clear.

[OctoberLily]

Thanks CountessKate.  You are always so helpful!

[Eric_Lowe]

I think there are more of them down the vault. I wonder why Catherine were not given more jewels to wear.

[Brassov]

The Duchess of Cambridge does not seem to be so keen on jewellery, although it would be wonderful to see her in the full regalia.

[CHRISinUSA]

Oh, we will eventually be treated to the the Duchess of Cambridge in full jewels.  I just wonder what the first occasion will be?  One of the State banquet this spring or autumn?  Or a banquet for the Queen's jubilee? 

[CountessKate]

I think that not only is it not really Catherine's style to pour on the jewellery, I think at the present time, with a great deal of economic hardship in the country, it might appear to be not in really good taste to flaunt the contents of the vaults and it is certainly an image the Cambridges have been at pains to avoid thus far. 

[Eric_Lowe]

I don't think the people will come down on Katherine in a ton of bricks just because she has a nice tiara and nice necklaces to wear. Crown Princess Mary of Denmark's jewels does put the Duchess of Cambridge's piece to the shade...

[OctoberLily]

I agree CountessKate.  The Cambridges have been quite low key and appear to be sensitive to the current economic situation, and I admire them for that.  Also, Catherine is more of the understated elegance type. In that regard, I think her choice of tiara for their wedding spoke volumes, actually being one of the smaller pieces that we know QEII possesses.  However, like Chris, I wonder just when we will see Catherine in full jeweled finery.  Personally I feel the sooner the better!

As far as CPss Mary of Denmark is concerned.....I think you are comparing apples to oranges there, Eric.  Firstly, CP Frederick is directly in line to inherit the Danish throne, whereas William is third in line to the British throne.  An extra generational gap is there.  Secondly, and most importantly, IMHO, is that this isn't a one-upping contest of jewels.  CPss Mary has what she has, and it remains to be seen what we will see Catherine wearing in the future. Comparing the two is not noteworthy.

[CountessKate]

I think also that while it is perfectly true that people wouldn't "come down on Katherine in a ton of bricks" because of wearing a lot of valuable jewellery, there are nuances which could negatively impact on their image which would be very apparent to the royal family as a whole and their advisers.  The UK taxpayer pays just over £40m, or roughly 62p per person a year to support the royal family, which is not a lot in the scheme of things, but for an individual could easily represent a desperately needed public service which has been withdrawn for economic reasons - and then for Catherine to appear in a lot of bling, while no doubt appropriate for the occasion and not representing any investment by the public, could nevertheless give rise to the question of why they don't just sell off some of the diamonds which are rarely if ever seen, have little or no historical or iconic significance, and help the country that way.  I can't imagine that the royal family would want to imperil their increased popularity which is riding on the Queen's diamond jubilee, by excessive contrasts of lifestyle with ordinary people.  It is interesting, in this context, that Crown Princess Letizia of Spain apparently had a new tiara some time ago, of which only a centre motif has ever appeared in public, worn as a brooch.  Given the state of Spain's economy, it isn't surprising it's been kept very low key, though there is no indication it is anything but a private gift made from private funds. 

Crown Princess Mary was given a historic parure left to her husband, and had a wedding tiara from the Queen of Denmark; moreover, these were presented in a rather more affluent time and people are now used to see her wear them and there is no surprise or feeling of undue showiness.  Her other jewellery is generally quite modest.  Given Catherine's current style and what appears to be her taste, there would be a genuine sensation if she were to start liberating some of the stuff in the vaults at this particular time, at least in any quantity.  I'm sure OctoberLily is right and that as time goes by, this is what will happen, but I think it will be done gradually.

[CHRISinUSA]

I can't argue that both the Duchess' simple personal tastes, and the austere time we are living in, may both be contributing to the lack of jewelry display until now.  However, I happen to think there is a more practical reason.

The plan (and with the obvious agreement of the Queen and PoW) seems to be to let William and Kate take the first couple of years of their marriage to launch themselves into royal duties at a snail's pace.  For the time being, they are being allowed to lead a semi-private life, with William still in the military and Kate being able to retain much of a private life, while undertaking a few key role duties here and there to learn the ropes.  Compared to how Diana was instantly thrust into full-scale royal life, I think this approach is much smarter.  I bet the Queen herself is happy that William and Kate can have a bit of the same "private life" that she and Phillip enjoyed early in their marriage while in Malta.

And as for the jewels - well, today jewelry is viewed as part of the uniform for a royal lady's formal duties - they usually only come out for full state functions (state banquets, openings of Parliament, official portraits, etc.).  Even the Queen, Anne, Camilla, Alexandria, etc.  do not pop on a tiara for a routine daytime engagement.  And to date, the Duchess of Cambridge is not participating in any of these formal functions, and therefore has no need of the full regalia.

My view is that when William's military duties end (presently expected in late 2012 or sometime in 2013) - the couple will assume a fuller program of royal duties; then the Duchess will be given additional jewels that she will require.  But I have a feeling that in the meantime (sometime this year), she'll attend her first "state function" and wear a tiara and other more important jewels.

[Vecchiolarry]

Hi,

I agree with Chris that Catherine should wait till there's a state banquet (maybe a Jubilee event at Windsor Castle) to wear a tiara.
But, it should remain a smaller one, so as not to outshine The Queen or Duchess of Cornwall....

Larry

[OctoberLily]

I think also that while it is perfectly true that people wouldn't "come down on Katherine in a ton of bricks" because of wearing a lot of valuable jewellery, there are nuances which could negatively impact on their image which would be very apparent to the royal family as a whole and their advisers.  The UK taxpayer pays just over £40m, or roughly 62p per person a year to support the royal family, which is not a lot in the scheme of things, but for an individual could easily represent a desperately needed public service which has been withdrawn for economic reasons - and then for Catherine to appear in a lot of bling, while no doubt appropriate for the occasion and not representing any investment by the public, could nevertheless give rise to the question of why they don't just sell off some of the diamonds which are rarely if ever seen, have little or no historical or iconic significance, and help the country that way.  I can't imagine that the royal family would want to imperil their increased popularity which is riding on the Queen's diamond jubilee, by excessive contrasts of lifestyle with ordinary people.

Agreed.

The plan (and with the obvious agreement of the Queen and PoW) seems to be to let William and Kate take the first couple of years of their marriage to launch themselves into royal duties at a snail's pace.  For the time being, they are being allowed to lead a semi-private life, with William still in the military and Kate being able to retain much of a private life, while undertaking a few key role duties here and there to learn the ropes.  Compared to how Diana was instantly thrust into full-scale royal life, I think this approach is much smarter.  I bet the Queen herself is happy that William and Kate can have a bit of the same "private life" that she and Phillip enjoyed early in their marriage while in Malta.

I believe that's a contributing factor, also.

But I have a feeling that in the meantime (sometime this year), she'll attend her first "state function" and wear a tiara and other more important jewels.

That's my feeling also.  I wouldn't be surprised to see something like this happen during one of the Jubilee celebrations, but you never know.

[Eric_Lowe]

I think it is a shame that Katherine did not possess even one tiara.Think she is the only one in the Royal Family not to have given a tiara. I am not talking about a lot of jewelery that would merit comment. A tiara is part of the "tricks of the trade" in being royal. I think Katherine will start wearing some this year during the jubliee celebration or else there will be comment on "the mean queen", while Camilla deck up in all her finery. It would be jarring to see Katherine dress like Angelina Jolie going to an award ceremony.

[aor]

At this point in her 'career', it should be about the quality and not the quantity......... Being Royal has nothing to do with the amount of Bling around ones body!

[Eric_Lowe]

Yes. But a tiara or crown has always been part of "the trade" as far as being royal goes. It does not help that Katherine's family are far from noble (Camilla was once quoted saying "as least my grandmother was a baroness"). Katherine needed that confirmation much more than Diana, who has her own ancestral jewels. I read Katherine's family had actually bought her a tiara themselves, maybe she will be wearing that this year. We will see...