Decades ago, when then-Prince Charles attended the official handover of Hong Kong to the CCP, he described the Chinese Communist leaders as “appalling old waxworks.” I think about that description more than I should, especially since the waxworks curse boomeranged back onto the Windsors in a stunning reversal of fortune.
Here are photos from last night’s Diplomatic reception at Buckingham Palace. In years past, even during King Charles’s reign, more of the Windsor clan comes out for this white-tie reception. In years past, Princess Anne, Prince Edward, the Duchess of Edinburgh and the Princess of Wales would all attend. This year, Kate was notably and publicly benched, as were the Edinburghs. It was just King Charles, Queen Camilla and Prince William in attendance. Camilla looked like the cat who got the cream. All three looked like they had seen better days though – Charles and Camilla absolutely fulfilled the “appalling old waxworks” prophecy.
Fashion notes: Camilla wore a velvet dress by Fiona Clare, who makes a lot of Camilla’s bespoke pieces. The dress is ghastly and dated – it would have looked dated even in the 1980s, back when Camilla began feathering her hair like that. Camilla paired the dress with QEII’s aquamarine-and-diamond tiara, which Camilla matched with her own aquamarine-and-diamond necklace and earrings. Meanwhile, Charles wore… knickerbockers and stockings.
So, do you think Camilla was the one who said that Kate should be benched? Or was it William who didn’t want to be overshadowed by keen jazz hands? Or did Charles suggest that Kate isn’t capable of making small talk with diplomats? It could be all of the above. It’s really crazy that they benched her for such a significant event, honestly. It’s also crazy that Camilla’s “chest infection” conveniently got her out of several boring events but she’s perfectly healthy to wear a tiara and smirk at people.
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.
-
- The Prince of Wales during the Diplomatic Corps reception at Buckingham Palace in London. Picture date: Tuesday November 19, 2024. PA Photo. See PA story ROYAL Diplomatic. Photo credit should read: Aaron,Image: 936503927, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: *** NO UK USE FOR 48 HRS ***, Model Release: no, Credit line: Aaron Chown/Avalon/Avalon
-
- King Charles III and Queen Camilla during the Diplomatic Corps reception at Buckingham Palace in London. Picture date: Tuesday November 19, 2024. PA Photo. See PA story ROYAL Diplomatic. Photo credit should read: Aaron,Image: 936503943, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: *** NO UK USE FOR 48 HRS ***, Model Release: no, Credit line: Aaron Chown/Avalon/Avalon
-
- Queen Camilla during the Diplomatic Corps reception at Buckingham Palace in London. Picture date: Tuesday November 19, 2024. PA Photo. See PA story ROYAL Diplomatic. Photo credit should read: Aaron,Image: 936503961, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: *** NO UK USE FOR 48 HRS ***, Model Release: no, Credit line: Aaron Chown/Avalon/Avalon
-
- King Charles III and Queen Camilla during the Diplomatic Corps reception at Buckingham Palace in London. Picture date: Tuesday November 19, 2024. PA Photo. See PA story ROYAL Diplomatic. Photo credit should read: Aaron,Image: 936503979, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: *** NO UK USE FOR 48 HRS ***, Model Release: no, Credit line: Aaron Chown/Avalon/Avalon
-
- Queen Camilla during the Diplomatic Corps reception at Buckingham Palace in London. Picture date: Tuesday November 19, 2024. PA Photo. See PA story ROYAL Diplomatic. Photo credit should read: Aaron,Image: 936504000, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: *** NO UK USE FOR 48 HRS ***, Model Release: no, Credit line: Aaron Chown/Avalon/Avalon
-
- The Prince of Wales during the Diplomatic Corps reception at Buckingham Palace in London. Picture date: Tuesday November 19, 2024. PA Photo. See PA story ROYAL Diplomatic. Photo credit should read: Aaron,Image: 936504057, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: *** NO UK USE FOR 48 HRS ***, Model Release: no, Credit line: Aaron Chown/Avalon/Avalon
-
- Queen Camilla during the Diplomatic Corps reception at Buckingham Palace in London. Picture date: Tuesday November 19, 2024. PA Photo. See PA story ROYAL Diplomatic. Photo credit should read: Aaron,Image: 936504103, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: *** NO UK USE FOR 48 HRS ***, Model Release: no, Credit line: Aaron Chown/Avalon/Avalon
-
- King Charles III during the Diplomatic Corps reception at Buckingham Palace in London Featuring: King Charles III Where: London, United Kingdom When: 19 Nov 2024 Credit: PA Images/INSTARimages **NORTH AMERICA RIGHTS ONLY**
-
- King Charles III and Queen Camilla during the Diplomatic Corps reception at Buckingham Palace in London. Picture date: Tuesday November 19, 2024. PA Photo. See PA story ROYAL Diplomatic. Photo credit should read: Aaron,Image: 936503943, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: *** NO UK USE FOR 48 HRS ***, Model Release: no, Credit line: Aaron Chown/Avalon/Avalon
All of them look their age, old. And you can always count on William to be photographed with the Black attendees.
Where are the pictures of Rose Hanbury????
We need some new non-boring Royal gossip material to discuss!!!
So I will say for a tiara event, aren’t others supposed to be wearing tiaras. Do they not take pics of the other guests? Just the gruesome trio? There must be others wearing tiaras?
@Bay! I feel like you’ve been MIA for a while. How are you??
@Jais I dont think there are usually other tiaras here because these are all diplomats – I guess some might have family tiaras but I can’t imagine that many. We typically only see tiaras at these kinds of events on other royalty or aristocracy (like Rose Hanbury will wear the Cholmondeley tiara to state dinners.)
Ah okay, thx becks1, life is dark so I’m like show me the jewels and stop hoarding them! I still think Charles and Camilla were wrong for not having tiaras at the coronation. Either do it like Denmark or go all the way big. @baytampabay, maybe you’ll get a Rose sighting at the Qatar state dinner.
@Jais – Tiaras are not worn by the hoi-polloi (even if they are diplomats) at diplomatic receptions. They are worn by royalty and the aristocracy at State Dinners. As far as I know it is only married women who are allowed to wear them.
Ok, my tiara ignorance is showing. Makes sense that the diplomats are not wearing tiara. So tiara event in this case means just for the royals that show up.
For the continental royals, tiaras don’t seem to be only worn by married women. The young princesses of the Netherlands and Norway and Belgium have worn tiaras regularly, but maybe that’s just among themselves at royal events. Tiaras used to be worn by women at the diplomatic event–there’s a famous Verdura tiara that was worn by the US Ambassador’s wife (something whitney??) at this specific event. But maybe tiaras are only for royals now at these kind of events.
@baytampabay YESSSSS
Rose’s fashion and lifestyle in her manor
The handsome equerry they stashed somewhere else
Lol, there’s something in the horse’s teeth in that first smirking close up picture! Just because they have wealth from genocide and colonialism doesn’t mean BRF has class.
That smirk always says to me, “I know I won the game of thrones”.
Side chick looks like she’s wearing a cheap velour bathrobe (the kind with the front zip) from WalMart! Seriously, does everyone just say yes to the faces of the left behinds, tell them how great they look, and then laugh all the way to the staff kitchen for a hot cuppa and more “did you see them?” giggles?
Okay don’t @ me, but I think cam’s dress is amazing. I love everything about it
I like it too! At least it didn’t have that heinous cadaver zipper running down the front like the rest of her outfits. She looks much better in rich colors.
But something about all the jewelry together looks messy and unkempt and then that one brown tooth? Say but you will about QEll, she always looked dignified and regal AF. Whereas you can practically hear the “whomp whomp” of letdown when Camilla appears.
I don’t love everything but I do love the color. Jewel tones are my favorite so I love moving into winter.
William is swimming in that jacket. Another valet fail. The man is incapable of dressing properly.
Agree Camilla’s dress is ugly and dated. She also needs to ease up on the Botox because that eye wank is severe. Also, Camilla’s own jewelry? Things that make you go hmmm…
When is the Qatar state dinner?
Charles bought Camilla a lot of jewelry especially back in the early days of their marriage and he received a fair amount of jewelry from the QM that I think Camilla has. and I think she’s gotten a LOT of gifts from various sources overseas (middle east etc.)
Good lord. What has she got stuck there in her front teeth. A bit of chaff?
No one bothered to tell her…lol!
And they published the photograpic evidence *Grinch smile*
I would have said some oats stuck in her teeth but chaff will do lol. I think the global putz and his negotiations were the reason Can’t wasn’t there. She has a set number of events and fancy state dinners are not in her contract. So no tiara for you Can’t.
My thought as well. (She’s also overdue for a dental cleaning—some plaque clearly visible.)
So embarrassing.
I was just going to say, does anyone see the food or bread stuck in her teeth? That’s just awful.
I do like her necklace.
I like the tiara. It’s delicate, but festive. It should be worn by someone younger, though. I could see Lady Louise or even Charlotte wearing it. Too bad it’s sitting on a horseface.
I noticed that too, OMG! Maybe she lost her gold-plated toothbrush and ran out of floss. LOL!
Or that’s an example of British dentistry, a tooth filling or something.
Whatever is stuck in her teeth doesn’t look as bad as her actual teeth. At least it’s white LOL.
She has a face to scare small children.
She is a walking infomercial for why not to smoke
😂
That is a huge chunk of something stuck between her teeth.. 🤭🤣.. love that it was caught by the photographer.
The mistress wife’s face and neck skin hangs worse than a shar pei breed of dogs skin does. She has always been an extremely homely woman age has only made it worse. She has locked that tiara vault up tight because it sure seems like since the real queen died the mistress wife is the only one allowed to wear any on the tiaras.. what a waste of all that gorgeous jewelry looks cheaper and gaudy being on her. Her dresses resemble my grandmother house coats from the late 80’s early 90’s not a formal dress.
Anne and Sophie each have their own tiaras and wouldn’t need to get Camilla’s permission to wear them, only Kate doesn’t have her own.
Anne has her own tiaras (two, I believe, the Meander and another one). Anne has never borrowed a tiara from the Queen that I know of….
Sophie only has the sad cat ears’ tiara that QEII lent her, she has none of her own. Since her wedding she’s been allowed to add two more ears to the tiara but afaik Sophie has never worn another one
@Harla: When it comes to Sophie this is not true. The tiara Camilla wore last night used to be worn by Sophie and Camilla made it known to the press that she lent Sophie the tiara that she wore to the Japanese State Dinner. Sophie wore the Lotus Flower tiara that was usually worn by Kate.
@harla… Wait that is odd. Why doesn’t she have her own? Shouldn’t she at this point?
Technically couldn’t William have spent his own “personal” duchy money to buy Kate a tiara or have one made? That way she’d have her own and wouldn’t have to depend on whoever’s in control of the jewels.
@amybee, camilla’s having worn a tiara that in recent decades has only been seen on Sophie makes me wonder if she’s pulled all of QE2’s long-term loans of jewelry from the senior Royal women.. Will we ever see Kate again in the pearl lovers’ knot tiara during Charles’ reign? Sophie has at least two tiaras of her own but until William steps up Kate may be beholden to Camilla for any tiaras scraps.
I’m pretty sure Sophie’s wedding tiara was a gift from the Queen, as was Fergie’s. So that is Sophie’s personal tiara. There was some scuttle about this because the queen did not gift Kate her wedding tiara, which would have been appropriate given Kate’s future role (and the cartier halo seems to be a good “Starter” tiara in that it doesnt look as heavy as the Cambridge lovers knot tiara.)
So sophie and Anne both have tiaras they could have worn, and in general we’ve seen Sophie in some significant pieces post QEIEE (when she wore the lotus flower tiara her necklace was also very pretty and bling-y.)
Kate doesn’t have her own because QEII didn’t gift her one, charles hasn’t, and William hasn’t at this point.
@Mayp she might have. We did see Kate in the lotus last year along with the strathmore rose (so someone opened the vault) but interesting that all of a sudden there is tiara sharing going on after decades of…..well, not going on.
Maybe Camilla did yank them all back and is doling them on out a per event basis based on who she is happiest with at the time.
I guess I had assumed that all the tiaras were in one royal vault somewhere and they had always needed to go and pick them up from there when they used them. So before, Kate and Sophie would have kept their loaned tiaras in their own homes? Interesting. And now we’re wondering if Camilla asked that they all be returned and is doling them out as she sees fit?
@jais, yes.
I’m more surprised that they just kept their tiaras with them. But I guess each place had its own safe? But if Camilla did gather them all back up, it would have come as a bit of a shock. Sign that the new regime was changing without AK anymore. So these ladies kept their tiaras in their own houses/palaces while Meghan was barely allowed anything. Cool cool.
@Jais — Slumlord Bill buying Kate her own Tiara? The last time he opened his wallet a moth flew out.
It looks like the wives of the Prince of Wales don’t get a personal tiara since they will have access to the monarch’s tiaras as soon as ghe become queen consort.
That may be the reason Fergie and Sophia received a personal tiara from Queen Elizabeth. AFAIK, they were extra ordered for them. The tiaras are later inherited by their sons and daughters.
Diana didn’t receive a tiara. She either wore the Spencer diadem or some other tiara from the Queen’s collection. After all, she was future queen consort.
As for Catherine, as the future consort, she doesn’t need a tiara since she will have so many to choose from.
I loved the tiara that Meghan wore to her wedding – it’s art decó which I love, but I did wonder why Meghan didn’t receive a personal tiara on her wedding day for herself and the future Duke of Sussex (Archie).
@random42, “…. I did wonder why Meghan didn’t receive a personal tiara on her wedding day for herself and the future Duke of Sussex (Archie).”
I pointed out here a long time ago that to my knowledge Meghan was the first newly created, non-heir, Duchess who did not receive her own tiara. Harry was also the first holder of a non-heir ducal title to not receive a property outright as a gift or a long-term lease paid for by the sovereign.
The Edinburgh’s were the only others that did not receive a home in their own name, in fee simple. I’m thinking that they wanted to live in the grand home they have now! And, it was always my understanding that the Queen paid in advance for their long-term lease. The Sussexes, particularly Meghan, were treated differently from the get-go.
So I had thought the home thing was bc the Queen viewed Harry as Charles’ to take care of, not hers – she took care of her children, Charles needed to take care of his.
but after reading Spare its clear that Harry was just an afterthought in so many ways. The fact that he and Meghan were at Nott cott even after it was announced she was pregnant with no announcement of a new home until she was well into her pregnancy was appalling (W&K had Nott Cott as well but 1A was announced fairly early for them when Kate announced her pregnancy and then Anmer) and then the lease they were given on Frogmore was so different from other leases.
I wonder how much of this was the men in grey and how much was QEII herself. I think its easy to blame either one or the other more than they might deserve, you know? My take is that it was more the men in grey and Charles and William and QEII went along with it bc she was more out of it for a much longer time than the palace wants to admit.
But, that might be giving her too big a pass.
It is an interesting point to discuss though – Harry was the first spare in recent generations that was really treated so shabbily. Yes Margaret was unhappy and an alcoholic, but financially she was fine, her sister always took care of her. Andrew was certainly protected and looked after by the institution and his mother, messy divorce aside.
And we can’t blame the disparate treatment solely on racism bc he was treated differently before he met Meghan.
I think Meghan didn’t get her own tiara because she wasn’t supposed to stick around. And they only got the Frogmore Cottage servants quarters on a short lease because they hadn’t gotten ride of her yet and she was going to have a baby. Had she not gotten pregnant, I believe she would have been stuck at that little Nott Cott. They didn’t even give her a tiara for the wedding until the Spencers offered theirs. They never had any intention of welcoming her into the family.
@ladyesther, I believe Sophie owns two tiaras, her wedding tiara (the sad cat tiara) and her modern aquamarine Wonder Woman tiara. Both of which were said to have been gifts from the Queen. She has also worn, as some have noted, other tiaras.
@lanne and @becks, I think you are both correct. The Royals didn’t want Meghan around and hoped that she would leave sooner rather than later. And, Harry was treated abysmally from day one, as compared to William. I don’t think Harry has addressed this but it was interesting that renovations had begun and were completed, I think while Meghan was pregnant, on Apt 1 in Kensington Palace. There was a bit of gossip that maybe this was going to go to Harry and Megan but they ended up at Frogmore Cottage.
Sometime after the Sussexes’ move to Frogmore I Cottage, it was reported in an Irish newspaper, I can’t remember which one, that Harry and Meghan did not move into Apt 1 because William wanted to use it for official “functions.”. Is this true? Did William not want them in a grand apartment? Or next door? Did the Queen yet again kowtow to Williams desires? All kinds of questions but it does come down to the continuation of the abysmal treatment of Harry by his family, compounded, of course, by his having married Meghan.
Was equal, or even decent, treatment of Harry by the Queen and Charles in general objected to by William? Clearly, Harry was treated differently, I think, from any other spare in modern British Royal history. Why?
By the way, is Apt 1 still empty? If not, who lives there? Or, is it just reserved for use by the Waleses or, God forbid, the Middletons? Why haven’t the Press been reporting on this? Or, have I missed reports on who lives in Apt 1 since the Gloucesters’ long ago move-out?
@lady Esther Sophie has two tiaras of her own. Her unattractive wedding tiara and her more appealing diamond and aquamarine one. The latter is rumored to perhaps be made from some jewels belonging to Philip’s mother Alice.
That’s what a lot of people assumed, @jais. One well-known example is that while we were all told Diana received her emerald and diamond choker from Queen Elizabeth as a gift it turns out that it was only a loan. But she had it in her possession until she died and it had to be returned to the coffers. That’s one example that we know of. I’m not sure if Sophie kept all of her tiaras in her possession but that was always the assumption on previous long-term loans. I think in recent years the Queen did loan some items out that went back to her vault. For example Sophie, for a state banquet, wore a set of jewelry that the Queen had only ever worn before and it was fabulous. And then, sure enough only five or six months later grabby Kate shows up at a diplomatic events wearing the earrings! Same thing with the Bahrain Pearl drop earrings. Sophie has worn those before but then Kate started wearing them and it appears that she has them now in her possession.
I have a question…when Peg becomes king will the control over the royal bling pass to Kate? Or is the control actually his and he doesn’t necessarily have to give her that power?
The latter. That’s why it is somewhat surprising that BP made it clear that Camilla had loaned some jewelry to Sophie at the last State dinner. Technically, the loan would have come from Charles. Unless, he has given Camilla his personal jewelry! Now, wouldn’t that be funny if William becomes King only to find out that Charles has given away the family jewelry!
I forgot to clarify that the jewelry only went to Charles to avoid taxes. Technically, he can do whatever he wants with the personal jewelry that he received from Queen Elizabeth. He could give the whole stash to Camilla’s kids if you wanted to. They would just have to pay enormous sums in taxes unless Charles lasted longer than 7 years after the gift.
Some of their jewelry is personal and some belongs to the crown/royal collection/etc. For example I think the Lovers Knot tiara is crown property.
Like @mayp said the personal jewelry is often monarch to monarch to avoid taxes but it doesn’t have to be. I almost wonder if some of Camilla’s stash was “given” to her kids already.
So technically all crown property and then whatever Camilla owns personally would be under Charles and/or Camilla’s control, I imagine Charles lets her have full control.
Yep, but I’m not sure that the lover’s knot tiara is Crown property. The one Monarch that designated the largest amount of items as Crown property was Queen Victoria. So, I’m not sure how much jewelry was designated Crown property by The sovereign between Queen Victoria’s death and the 1990s (when the rule came into effect that jewelry received by working Royals in some instances is public property).
I may be wrong but I’m thinking that the vast majority of the Queen’s jewelry was in her own personal collection because I think we would have heard if she had designated some of it to be Crown jewelry (and I think she either inherited or was given the lovers knot tiara). I don’t think she’s ever even worn the diamond and ruby, formerly opal, tiara that QV designated as crown property. But who knows, they have become so cagey about such matters!
@mayp I think they keep it deliberately obtuse bc saying “oh these aren’t the monarch’s they belong to THE CROWN” is an easy out if people complain about the royal family’s jewels or looking out of touch etc. Same thing with the golden piano – we were told we couldn’t complain about the queen owning one because it wasn’t “really” hers but belonged to The Crown.
I’ve fallen down a bit of a rabbit hole and there’s speculation that QEII may have left many of her tiaras to the Crown (which apparently her mother and grandmother did as well) and then there’s another reference to Queen Mary leaving the Lovers Knot tiara (not the cambridge LK which apparently is different from the one that Kate wears) to the crown collection.
Regardless at this point for practical purposes its all pretty much under Camilla’s control.
Well this is interesting. I never heard about any sovereign from maybe George v on down that designated any jewels as “heirlooms of the crown” (not even sure what that means, crown jewels or something else – is it still the property of the sovereign?). Queen Victoria left what remained of Queen Caroline’s and Queen Adelaide’s jewelry and some of her own jewelry as Heirlooms of the Crown but if they don’t specify what is what then they can move around, categorically, much of the jewelry and call it whatever they want for whatever purpose they want at any time. It baffles me how they’re getting away with that!
She should have given up smoking 50 years ago.
Don’t blame nicotine for that face. That’s pure equine meanness.
I think this is a very Camilla look, its fine. I do like that we are seeing more jewels with her though. I know QEII used to shake up quite a bit but I feel like by the end of her reign it was a lot of the same tiaras and necklaces etc.
I feel like if Anne isn’t there its because she didn’t want to be (a lot of times when she misses these kinds of events you realize later she was traveling or something.) I just checked and she wasn’t traveling but she was in suffolk for the day. so maybe she didnt’ like attending after working all day, IDK.
I think its weird that neither Edward nor Sophie are there, but maybe no one else noticed.
Kate being benched for this event is especially weird for the reasons we discussed yesterday, especially bc the excuse given was so weak. I don’t think Charles or Camilla would have actually told William she couldnt go, I imagine it would have been more like “well there’s just not a tiara for her darling.”
I feel like if she’s not there at an event like this with William, its because she was told to stay home.
So I think that it was actually put into the CC that Kate worked from home yesterday. For the Christmas Carole thing. But I think it was in the morning so presumably she could have gone to the tiara event. Maybe we’re supposed to intuit that working in both the morning and the night would have been too much for her?
She held an early years meeting according to the CC which is also interesting but I think Kaiser has another post about it.
While I really don’t care that Kate didn’t attend, I’m wondering why Anne, Edward and Sophie weren’t there. My understanding was that the late queen had as many royals there as possible so that the guests all had a chance to meet a royal, with only 3 in attendance that just isn’t possible. I will say, it’s fascinating watching Charles’ reign slide off the cliff. 😃
Not in the last few Diplomatic receptions that the Queen attended before her death. The royal attendance was cut down to Charles, Camilla, Kate, William and the Queen.
I think some are confusing this reception with state dinners in general. At state dinners you tend to see more royal family members bc they are there to socialize with the delegation, walk into dinner with them, etc so its a different calculus re: who is invited. For example Sophie was at the South Korean state dinner last year but I don’t think she’s attended the diplomatic reception for years.
@AmyBee, I wonder is that was Charles’ doing, the whole slim-down monarchy and putting his line of succession front and center?
It’s amazing, isn’t it? The rest of the world isn’t paying the Windsors much attention at the moment, but for those who are watching and well-informed the RF’s 2024 has really been one for the ages. I started royal watching in 1997 and this is actually a banner year. And that doesn’t even include all the fun we’ve had dishing on Denmark and Norway lately. Just amazing stuff.
Camzilla looks *very* tanned. Beyond the caked makeup.
I love that one trumpeteer’s/guard’s side-eye as KC enters the room.
I hope the diplomats were able to enjoy themselves and the food was good.
Well, I think she’s taken multiple trips to her spa in India, hasn’t she? Before and after the Australia trip, at least.
I guess they don’t have sun screen there. She looks like a dried up apple that’s been in the sun too long. Ugh!
Maybe another trip to the luxury Indian spa to recuperate?
Such a crass woman…. That tampon king preferred her to Lady Di will always be a mystery to me despite his well-known jealousy of Diana!
Such a perfect word to to describe her, crass. Perfect!
Are we sure Kate was benched or has she used her health to negotiate a better work schedule? I think she weighed up the State Dinner and the Diplomatic Reception and chose the State Dinner in December. The State Dinner is the more glamourous event. As for Camilla, the tiara she wore was lately worn by Sophie. Is Camilla the real reason why Angela Kelly was kicked out?
Harry said, Angela was leaking a lot of bad stories about all the members of the family including Charles to protect QE2’s rep. That is why Charles kicked her out as soon as possible and made her sign an NDA in exchange of giving her a retirement house far away from them. I don’t think that was on Camilla.
So I can see a bigger turnout for the Qatar event. And we will have to wait and see if Kate is there. If she is, will that mean that she chose not to go to this one or that she was she just benched? Idk? And do you think Camilla was trying to make a point by wearing a tiara previously associated with Sophie? And I’ve always seen Camilla as Charles’ Angela Kelly, the one playing games for him in the press.
I don’t know if Camilla was trying to make a point but when I saw her in that tiara my first thought was oh wow, did Camilla grab back all of the previous long-term loans of jewelry?
I think in general Camilla may be less obsessed with not sharing jewels. There wasnt a lot of tiara sharing in the BRF over the last few decades – if QEII let someone else wear a tiara, that person was the only one who wore it (thats why even though QEII had worn the tiara that we saw on Camilla last night, it hadn’t been for decades and especially not since Sophie started wearing it.) The general consensus when Kate started wearing tiaras was that she had the use of two – the smaller Lotus Flower and Cambridge Lovers Knot for her big gun tiara. And I dont think most expected anyone besides Kate to wear those two until she became Queen.
While the Strathmore Rose is a beautiful tiara and it was a surprise to see Kate wearing it last year, i think many of expected to see Kate in more “big gun” tiaras so to speak.
Anyway re: The Qatari state dinner. We’ll have to see what happens. I can see that being harder because you end up sitting near a small group and if things get awkward for Kate she can’t move away. If I were her I’d prefer the diplomatic reception over the state dinner. but maybe she thought the state dinner would be more bling-y??
I don’t know. I tend to believe that if she wasn’t there last night then it wasn’t her choice.
If Kate goes to the upcoming state dinner she will most likely see Rose H. My guess is that if invited she will be there if only to keep an eye on her husband.
Pegs profile with that beard gives him a more pronounced chin something not flattering to his appearance. Camilla s photos are not airbrushed and Charles looks feeble
Hi Tessa, I can assure you Camilla’s photographs, all of the above photos have been edited. Just because she doesn’t have * Instagram * face, doesn’t mean these pics didn’t get a bit of digital help whilst processing (Capture One or Lightroom) I use both. I know what I can do without ever opening Photoshop or any post processing editing software
I also replied below. I am amazed. Photo shopping does not help. She smoked too much and when she went out hunting I read she never used sunscreen. All those years of that ruined her complexion
Of course, Sophie is Kate’s BFF, so if Kate was benched Sophie skipped out of solidarity with her. (JK) I wonder if Anne is all the way back to normal. She had an incident with a horse fairly recently.
If Sophie got invited she d have been there.
I don’t think William wanted Kate there. He probably thought he paid his dues where he had to respond to her pda in the shampoo commercial video.
Or maybe Charles didn’t have enough money to feed Kate for that meal. It happens.
Camzilla wore her best Sears velvet housecoat for the event. How festive. Why is Charles in knee socks and breeches?
LOL! Charles looks like an overgrown page boy in that get-up! All he needs are buckled shoes. Ridiculous!
@Chrissy – He WAS wearing buckled shoes!
And a fancy gold garter! He looks like a twit.
Oh dear, the BM won’t be getting a lot of clicks from this one.
To think these photographs you’ve shown here of Camilla are still retouched. Imagine irl
Tinfoil theory. Kate got Remembrance Day. Camilla benched Kate so she could be the only one in a fkn tiara and frocking hideous *evening dress*
I think people are deluded by how much C&C LOVE kinging and queening
I know if my furkid companion and BFF of 12/14 years (I dunno how old her doggie was) you wouldn’t be able to drag me out from under my duvet for the Crown Jewels themselves
My parents are almost 60 and I stg we’ll need to put them in an induced coma when their old boy passes
Wow they were retouched. It did not help much. She wrecked her complexion by smoking and too much sun exposure.
@Hannah – I’m sure Camilla was devastated that her beloved Jack Russell terrier had had to be put down (as was I whenever one of my pets died) last Monday, but life goes on. QEII lost one of her corgis not long before she died. That distressed her too but it didn’t stop her carrying out her official duties.
It’s not just Australia who is canceling the RF, so are parts of Canada – https://www.cjme.com/2024/11/20/no-disrespect-to-his-majesty-yukon-council-refuses-to-take-oath-to-king/
This is great. I am Canadian and I hadn’t seen this. We really need an alternative oath/affirmation that respects our indigenous population.
Alright, I gotta talk about Charles. When I first saw this pic, I was baffled bc it kind of looked like he was wearing a black pencil skirt and I could not figure out what tradition has Charles wearing a black pencil skirt. But I guess it’s breeches? I couldn’t tell from the pic.
Joe Kennedy had to wear breeches as ambassador but that was ages ago. Why is Charles wearing them.
I think its part of the Order of the Garter here for Charles. I think William might also be wearing them. So its a status thing.
and if its not order of the garter, then there is another reason. Like the breeches convey a certain status or order.
Ah, okay, interesting. It was more that the lighting of the picture had it so I couldn’t even tell they were breeches! But status breeches make sense.
I actually liked that look on Charles. It was more interesting than regular ill fitting pants he’s been in lately.
I’d be mortified to be seen in his shoes. They look like something Humpty Dumpty would wear.
The only dress I ever liked on Camilla was her wedding dress when she married Charles. Anything else looks on Camilla ill-fitted, old-fashioned and boring.
I did not like that dress. I did like the outfit she wore to the registry wedding.
She wore a cape dress in france recently that was pretty good?
Kate was benched because Camilla wanted the shine on her. The Fail only had 415 comments on that event. Watch thwnpress push for Kate to appear at the Qatar State dinner.
I think William did not want Kate there and was ok with the decision
At least Cam’s participation medal matched the bedspread she wore.
Charles looks very dated in his garter. If he wanted to set himself apart by adhering to tradition, he has also declared that he is now a fossil. He waited over half a century to take his mother’s place- so long that time has passed him by. He doesn’t realized that a new century has long arrived and he needed to reinvent the monarchy to stay relevant culturally. Slavishly representing tradition will no longer cut it. His appearance could make one burst out laughing.
I think the aquamarine tiara has been worn solely by Sophie in the past few years, so has Camilla “taken back” the late Queen’s previous loans? Interesting that it’s a smaller tiara than Camilla usually wears. She is able to carry huge ones. The necklace is lovely. I think the diplomatic reception was traditionally attended only by the Queen, Philip, and the heir and spouse. As someone has already mentioned, state dinners attended by more members of the family.
@Tamsin – The heir and spouse? So where was Kate then? I think it looks very bad that she wasn’t there.
Her dress is ghastly, as is almost everything she wears. I thought the navy cape she wore in Paris was nice, but Camilla will always be a pig tarted up in lipstick to me.
I find that everything she wears resembles a house coat -long and loose. Also her bra game is so bad. Really, everything about her is baggy and saggy. Is she could stand up straight, that would help a lot IMO. OTOH, the way she presents herself would never overshadow Charles, which is something we know he would never tolerate.
The new family honour on Camilla is out-sized! Will Camilla be the only one wearing one? Kate is benched, Meghan driven out. Maybe Anne.
It does look bigger than the previous family orders. What I want to know is why isn’t Camilla wearing Queen Elizabeth’s family order? I didn’t notice whether she did or didn’t at the last state dinner but since they’ve been giving those out the women would wear any of the family orders they had been given. So, when a sovereign died, they would still continue to wear that person’s family order along with the new one. Is Camilla shaking things up? Is this a sign she’s glad the ol’ battle ax is gone?! 😅
Huh. Love me some royal order drama as evident from the photos. Camilla is wearing Charles’s royal order but not his mum’s. This strikes me as unusual – QEII wore her dad’s, and her mom and sister always wore George VI and Liz’s, so protocol allows them to wear the royal order of a deceased sovereign.
I remember that Diana got her royal order from QEII, a big one, in the *first year* of her marriage. Camilla had to wait a few years on a small one. Kate also only got a small one, and a few years in. I always thought it was quite pointed how long Kate had to wait, or maybe some kind of dark royal humor…
Now Camilla has a big order from Charles and doesn’t wear her MIL’s? Meanwhile we don’t know if Kate received one too but it seems probably not?
I thought her skipping her royal family order from QEII was striking, and if there isn’t any pearl clutching in the press, that surprises me. Across time and across royal houses, it’s customary for a royal woman to wear all the royal family orders she has (the ones with the bows given to women with a portrait of the monarch, not orders of chivalry with the sashes and the stars).
@Kailua_Girl I would add that QEII, her sister and her mother also wore the royal family order of George V, her grandfather in addition to the ones you listed, so George V and VI for Liz, and Liz and both Georges for her sister and mother.
@kahlua, sorry I just commented above about Camilla’s missing family order – I didn’t see your comment! But you are both very right, it is unusual that she is not wearing Queen Elizabeth’s family order and it is odd that the Rota has not mentioned this.
Okay, I did check and Camilla wore Queen Elizabeth’s family order at the State dinner with Japan recently. So is this a one-off or a sign of a change? I guess we’ll learn that next month at the State dinner with Qatar.
Kate got the RVO after the Rose affair rumors (did those rumors break in 2019?) and then I think at the diplomatic reception in 2019 she was seen with the family order, but the press insisted she had worn it the year before – which I doubt because it seems weird we would have gone a full year without hearing about it.
so it took Kate at least 7.5 years for the family order but more likely 8.5.
Cos play at its finest! Love those slippers Charles is wearing! Willy should have worn his airplane slippers.
They have buckles on them
Not a lot of glamour. Can’t imagine the British press will be happy with these looks. Camilla is an old lady, and she looks like an old lady dressed up. Charles looks like a sick old man, which is what he is. William is a bigger mystery to me. This is a man in his 40’s who appears to be shrinking in front of our eyes. He is obviously ill, very thin, and haggard. You would think they would allow Kate to attend solely to take the focus off the rest of them.
I am surprised I can’t find any negative reaction in the press to Camilla not wearing QEII’s family order, but in googling for it, I came across a story from Tatler claiming that Camilla wearing that aquamarine tiara is an affectionate nod to Sophie 😆😂🤣😂 Right! Recalling QEII long term loan of it from Sophie and wearing it at an event for which Sophie was denied an invitation is such a positive for Sophie 😂🤣😂🤣😂
This is the slimmed down monarchy that Chuck wanted. Also, Cam wants to be the only one wearing a tiara. Yesterday I was kind of shocked that Kate was benched but now I think it makes sense. Edward and Sophie could have went to the movie premier or this dinner but I guess C&C didn’t want them.
Charles looks absolutely ridiculous. It’s beyond time to end this nonsense.
Honestly? This current monarchy is a joke and an insult to Britain. They’re a bunch of adulterers, rage monsters, airheads and pedo-enablers with monstrous egos. Nothing more. Plus ugly as sin to boot, all of them.
What a motley looking crew .
Dear lord they all look like the life has been sucked out of them .
I hope Diana is looking down, chortling at the mess that is Camilla. She’s dressed like a 1970s couch.
I don’t think we can talk about a boomerang effect when Charles already looked terrible when he made that tasteless remark.
Did she really have to claw the tiny aquamarine tiara away from Sophie? I mean, she has vaults full of ancient not seen before in this century pieces. Nasty move.
Usually jewels enhance beauty and attractiveness. The jewels do nothing for her. She actually detracts from the gems.
It’s like putting a tiara on a decomposed rotting skull.