Duchess Meghan wanted to wear a tiara in Fiji, Prince Charles told her ‘no’

The Duke of Sussex and Duchess of Sussex attend a traditional Fijian ceremony

As everyone predicted, there were a million new stories about the Duchess of Sussex being a “diva” or “demanding” or whatever over the past week. Some might even say there’s an agenda to shove the Sussexes under the bus so the Cambridges look better. This one is a puzzler, and it calls back the other puzzling, mystifying story from last fall’s smear campaign. Last fall, it was claimed that Meghan “demanded” a particular emerald tiara from the Royal Collection for her wedding day look. Some people bought the story, but I always had a “???” thought bubble about it. It never made any sense – did Meghan research all of the tiaras in the Royal Collection and ask for one particular piece, only to be told that Princess Eugenie had already called dibs on it? Is that likely? Or is it more likely that the Queen gave Meghan a choice of several tiaras and Meghan picked one and that was the end of it? I still don’t really know. In any case, Tiara Drama has a new chapter:

The Prince of Wales told the Duchess of Sussex not to wear a tiara to her first overseas state dinner, fearing it might look ‘extravagant’. The Mail on Sunday can reveal that Prince Charles intervened over plans by Meghan to wear a lavish headpiece to an event in Fiji last October. The Duchess had hoped to borrow a jewelled tiara from the Royal Collection for the event, but she was advised by her father-in-law that such ostentation is avoided in parts of the Commonwealth where it can be seen as reminiscent of a bygone era or ‘extravagant’.

A source said: ‘Meghan did not understand all of this because she was new to the role and so Prince Charles told her that it would not be appropriate. It was very kindly done.’

The absence of a tiara drew attention when Meghan, wearing a blue full-length gown by Safiyaa, arrived for the dinner hosted by the president of Fiji Jioji Konrote – not least because the Duchess of Cambridge wore a large diamond and pearl headpiece once owned by Princess Diana to a state banquet at Buckingham Palace on the same night. Meghan did, however, wear a pair of diamond earrings that are thought to have been borrowed, possibly from the Royal Collection, which is the largest private collection of art in the world.

Charles is believed to have taken a greater role in planning official foreign trips made by the Royal Family since the Queen gave up overseas tours in 2015. Commonwealth leaders formally announced last year that he will succeed his mother as the next head of the organisation and aides say he is determined to show respect to each of its 53 member states. The UN estimates the average monthly wage in Fiji to be just £400 and it is thought Charles considered the tiara would ‘not be in keeping with modern monarchy’.

Last night an insider told the Mail on Sunday: ‘The Prince, having travelled to all these places many times over many years, is very well placed to give advice on such matters.’

[From The Daily Mail]

Once again, the Daily Mail made it sound like Meghan “demanded” something, when really she was probably just asking for advice as she and Harry planned their Sussex South Pacific Tour. She likely asked Charles, “Should I wear a tiara for this dinner? Is that appropriate?” And Charles advised her not to. And now, months later, they’re making it into a thing because the Marchioness of Cholmondeley has a big mouth.

This is the look which Meghan thought was tiara-ready. She’s right – a small tiara would have looked amazing with this dress.

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Getty, Backgrid.

Related stories

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

118 Responses to “Duchess Meghan wanted to wear a tiara in Fiji, Prince Charles told her ‘no’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Mich says:

    Her wedding dress designer probably had a particular tiara in mind.

    • Megan says:

      I believe she was interested in a tiara of sketchy Russian provenance. Given the tensions between the UK and Russia due to the Skripol poisonings it would have been been impolitic for Meghan to wear that tiara.

      • Ainsley7 says:

        Exactly. She chose the tiara before the poisoning and had to choose again. It was Harry who allegedly behaved badly anyway.

      • Kerfuffle says:

        The only way for that to be correct is that the Queen had to have presented Meghan with this mystery Russian tiara (the issue stated was that it was of “unknown provenance” meaning that they couldn’t properly trace this tiara’s origins – that doesn’t fit any of the Queen’s publicly worn tiaras so it would HAVE to be something from the vault) and then said “oops, never mind”. Which doesn’t sound at all like how the Queen does stuff. It definitely wasn’t Eugenie’s emerald tiara, which doesn’t fit the “unknown provenance” either nor the “Russian” part, because it was a part of the Greville bequest.

      • Silas Marner says:

        Was that ever clarified? The Times story was very vague and confusing. Kate was offered a selection of tiaras when she got married and if the same was done for Meghan, why was a tiara with a sketchy, unclear background offered? And a few months later, Eugenie wore an emerald tiara which makes the story even more confusing.

      • Megan says:

        The royal collection must have more than one emerald tiara. Meghan may have requested an emerald option and that is why it was selected.

      • Silas Marner says:

        But why would Meghan not be offered the same acceptable tiara as Eugenie or if Eugenie chose first then why would Meghan want to copy the same tiara look? Nothing else about the aesthetics of the two weddings were similar.

        I wonder if Meghan had first dibs on the emerald tiara and the Yorks threw their weight around and took it or Angela Kelly wanted to give it to the Yorks instead. And the Queen allowed it because Andrew is her favorite and that’s why she had to step in and make peace. And then this strange and incomplete story was placed in the Times as a favor to someone highly connected.

        And I want to know more about the sketchy Russian tiara. Do the Windsors have stolen jewelry in their collection?

      • Kerfuffle says:

        Again: do you really think that The Queen offered Meghan a tiara that she never intended to let her use? Yes, the British collection is vast, but there are only 2 tiaras with emeralds that have been worn publicly – and we didn’t see Eugenie’s until her wedding and the other is one that Meghan would never choose. It just doesn’t make sense. Unless the Queen and Angela Kelly let Meghan wander through the jewelry vaults and check everything out, Meghan would likely only be familiar with what was either already publicly worn, or what was presented to her. And the Queen is very, very intentional with how she deals with her tiaras.

      • Lolo says:

        I’ve always thought the “Russian origins” story was cover for the fact that Meg wanted to wear the tiara that had already been selected by Eugenie. I don’t really have a basis for this other than the fact that their tiaras, minus the emerald, looked rather similar, and it makes more sense to me that that’s what happened rather than that there was a tiara hanging out in the “available tiaras” area of the royal collection that they wouldn’t be able to place and therefore couldn’t be worn. Also Eugenie and Jack have been together for a lot longer and reportedly had to put off announcing their engagement and their wedding so Harry and Meg could go first so if all that happened I could see where the queen would give Eugenie first pick of tiara, for being a team player.

      • Tina says:

        I still think the Queen offered Meghan the Vladimir with the pearls, Meghan asked for it with the emeralds and the Queen said no because Eugenie was going to have an emerald tiara. Then when relations worsened with Russia, it was clear that the Vladimir wouldn’t be appropriate under any circumstances. The Queen hasn’t worn it since 2014 (and yes, I know, the Queen never lends the Vladimir, etc. But the Queen can do whatever she wants, and she (especially at that point) was bending over backwards to welcome Meghan to the family).

      • oddly says:

        The Russian provenance this was utter rubbish, half the tiaras in the royal vaults have Russian links, the Vadamirov is the biggest and Queen Mary bought at least two from the fleeing Romanovs which are often worn. Someone made that story up, either at Buck Palace or a media hack.

        Nobody wears the Vladamirov but the Queen Tina, it’s her state occassion big gun, she most certainly would not have offerd it to Meghan.

        There was tea spilt by one of the jewel experts from Christies a month or so before the wedding , apparently Charles Spencer had offered to loan her the Spencer Tiara frequently worn by Diana, it was almost a done deal until someone pointed out to Harry that Earl Spencer had been in talks about selling the tiara through Christies and it was likely a ploy to up the sale price. Either Prince Charles or the Queen put the brakes on that idea.

      • Lucylee says:

        Provenance isn’t sketchy. After all these years they didn’t know it’s origin? I may have been born yesterday but I stayed up studying so I could recognize bs when I see it.

    • Birdy says:

      I always assumed there are archives / catalogues of the royal collection that the family and staff access – jewellery, paintings, furniture, etc. The tiara story made me think Meghan looked at the archive, had one in mind but when she met with the queen, the one she wanted was not on offer. No-one misbehaving or being a diva.
      I assume it would be the same with furnishing their new house. They choose from the archive of items not in use, the queen has to sign off on it then it gets delivered to them, I doubt they are hunting through storage spaces through the UK to see the family collection and to figure out what would work in their home.

  2. Eyfalia says:

    I’m only waiting for her to have the baby. Everything else gets on my nerves.

    • Millenial says:

      It’s got to be any day now. We need some happy Meghan news. And maybe the press will lay off for a while (one can hope).

  3. MissyS. says:

    These negative Meghan stories are so ridiculous and petty. I now believe the rumors that Meghan is being thrown under the bus to cover up other issues within the Royal Family.

    I will make sure to donate to some charities this week in Meghan’s honor for the #GlobalSussexBabyShower. Some positivity is needed to combat the negativity.

    • Mia says:

      @MissyS, I plan on donating to a charity as well. Some of the Royal Reporters are trying to make #GlobalSussexBabyShower a bad thing but it’s not working. Just people from all cultures who are showing support. One supporter tweeted a prayer and one of the Racist Royal Reporters called it a rap. They and everyone can stay mad.

      • Susannah says:

        I saw those comments too and they’re all over even in the Telegraph and other sites. How bitter and resentful do you have to be that you’re upset about money being donated to charity!
        Well, they can be even more resentful as I donated money to the GlobalSussexBabyShower in both the U.S. and the U.K in honor/honour of the baby’s parentage!

    • Sunnee says:

      #GlobalSussexBabyShower. Yesterday I donated to CamFed and today to Mayhew. I thinks it’s a wonderful idea that someone on Twitter spearheaded. I read that it’s upsetting some people, but who cares?

      • Giddy says:

        I commented on this on the other thread but just wanted to repeat what an incredibly positive thing this is. The three charities listed have been overwhelmed by donations, and it shows the global positive opinion of Meghan and Harry.

      • Becks1 says:

        Aw this makes me cry (in a good way). I hope Meghan hears about it.

      • Mich says:

        @Giddy – You have to work really hard to be upset about this. Some people aren’t happy unless they are unhappy.

      • Royalwatcher says:

        Becks1 – the Sussexes have definitely heard about it. Omid reported this morning that the charities have been reporting in to KP about the online movement/donations and they (Sussexes) were floored (or something like that). Camfed donations are up to 15k or more, I think.

        I donated to Camfed and Mayhew and it felt to good to be connected to so many other like-minded people over the weekend. It was a wonderful idea and (for anyone who’s interested), it’s running through to US Mother’s Day in May. Not to late to donate to one of the Sussexes charities or a different one that you are connected to. #GlobalSussexBabyShower

    • Bren says:

      I donated to CamFed.

  4. MousyB says:

    Its really disgusting how these stupid stories are all piling up while she is pregnant. This is one of the reasons I believe her when she says she doesnt really read tabloid gossip about herself (im sure she has staff to keep her in the loop in general) – I could only imagine how stressful that wuold be.

  5. Penny says:

    this and the vanity fair piece are deflections from the real story…Also, please cover the donations collected in honor of Baby Sussex, the fans did some incredible work this weekend and charities really benefited from it.

    • Lady D says:

      Excellent idea. The more the story spreads, the more these charities benefit. Goodwill and good publicity all around.

    • Sparkly says:

      Interesting.

      The comments here are the first I heard of the story. Glad to learn about it, and I’m definitely looking for more info and how/where to participate.

  6. Jen says:

    I think this is a non-story. It doesn’t sound like Meghan was upset by it. “I’d like to wear a tiara.” “It’s not really appropriate because reasons.” “Ok.”

    I mean, there’s no hint that she got mad or threw a tantrum?

    • tempest prognosticator says:

      She asked and Charles advised against it. Sounds fine to me. She looked radiant in the blue gown.

      • Kerfuffle says:

        I don’t get what Charles would “advise against”. It wasn’t a Tiara event in the first place.

      • Becks1 says:

        And my guess is that is what Charles told her. “It’s not a tiara event.” Someone commented here that she would know when a tiara is appropriate and when it’s not, but how would she know unless someone told her? So I can see there being a conversation about it. It doesn’t mean she stamped her feet and had a tantrum.

      • jan90067 says:

        I thought it was said to be a State Dinner. Tiaras are usually worn to State Dinners in the UK. Perhaps that’s why she may’ve thought to ask?

      • Himmiefan says:

        It sounds like a very brief exchange made in passing. A nothing story blown out of proportion.

      • minx says:

        Agree. I doubt she got in a tug-of-war over a tiara.

      • oddly says:

        @Jan90067……. Tiaras are usually only worn by the Queen at foreign state dinners, except on state occasions hosted by foreign Royals, such as state banquets or royal anniversary/ wedding banquets when stated so on the invitation.

        The Scandinavians and Dutch Royals love their tiaras and will wear them when ever the opportunity arises. The British Royals usually keep them for British state banquets now, but they used to wear them frequently at theatre galas and all banquet dinners, especially those hosted by the guilds. Anne, Sophie, the Dss of Gloucester and Princess Michael of Kent will sometimes wear them at white tie Guild Dinners and the Lord Mayor of London Banquet.

        Fiji was certainly not the place for a tiara but she wasn’t to know this, a lovely jeweled brooch in an updo would have been fine if she wanted some extra sparkle.

        When Meghan is invited to a British State Banquet she will most certainly get to wear one. None are scheduled for this year yet and it might very well be a Trump banquet when the next one is announced. Won’t that be awkward.

    • ByTheSea says:

      It sounds more like “Is this a dinner where I should wear a tiara? If so, how do I go about that?” and the response “No, it’s not the right setting for a tiara.” “Okay.”

  7. Megan says:

    Fan fiction. Meghan would have known that a tiara would not have been appropriate for that event. And why would Charles intervene? Was he helping her pack and saw the tiara?

    • Lulu says:

      Well, in fairness, I’m not sure that she would know. After all, we mainly see tiaras at banquets and Meghan might not have realised that an overseas dinner is different to a state banquet at Buckingham Palace. And presumably she couldn’t just go and grab a tiara – she’d probably have an assistant put in a request to the royal collection, who then flagged it up to the Queen/Charles who then stepped in. But it does seem very non-drama – she asked, Charles said no, that was the end of it. Meghan didn’t seem to be gnashing her teeth over being denied and she may have been loaned the earrings to make up for it anyway.

      • Royalwatcher says:

        But this is why she has advisors who WOULD know when she will and won’t be wearing a tiara. Wasn’t Samantha Cohen – straight from the queen’s offices – with them on tour?

        There is just no part of me that believes Meghan is running around making all of these greedy gimmie-a-tiara gaffes. Not only does she have informed staff to advise her, she has Harry, who has been a royal since birth and would surely know the standards for various state dinners at home vs abroad and work engagements (not to mention the stupid things like nailpolish color, closing car doors, writing notes on bananas, not needing to wear a hat with the queen, etc.). Meghan isn’t going into this alone. And she – unlike stubborn William – doesn’t seem the type to purposely go against advisors just to be contrary.

        Regarding the other (stupid) story about her wanting a different wedding tiara – if the tiara she supposedly wanted was so obscure, how did she even know of its existence? How could she be demanding something no one even knows about.

        The queen’s pattern has been to choose a few tiaras, offer them to the bride to be, and then the bride chooses from those offered. There is no way Meghan would be demanding anything other than what was offered by the queen. I mean, who among us, if offered a gift, would demand the gift-giver give us something they weren’t even offering?! No one.

  8. Ye says:

    The news are making scandals about nothing.

    Imagine if every little comment you made was put on the front page. I wouldnt survive a day without at least ten scandals.

    Personally I think a tiara wasnt the right move, but I’m just looking at the dress and not the(rather stale) norms that Charles knows more about than me.

  9. minx says:

    I think the beautiful earrings she wore were enough, a tiara…I dunno.

    • Royalwatcher says:

      Okay, so granted this is from the DM – purveyor of lies, racism and trash – and probably all made up, but the part that is most interesting to me is the bit slipped in about the earrings.

      ” Meghan did, however, wear a pair of diamond earrings that are thought to have been borrowed, possibly from the Royal Collection, which is the largest private collection of art in the world.”

      We were previously told nothing about the origin of these earrings to the point people were saying the were from some scandalous source or borrowed from a jeweler, which was a big no-no (again to slam Meghan for not knowing what she’s not supposed to be doing as a royal). But now we hear that they are actually from the royal collection!

  10. Char says:

    Yep, the tiara would be too much, not the fact you colonized a island and centuries later still think it belongs to you.

  11. Becks1 says:

    I can see her wondering if a tiara was appropriate and charles talking to her about what is and is not a tiara event, but that’s different than the tone of “Meghan demanded to wear a tiara.”

    It’s almost like the RRs are avoiding talking about another issue….

    • windyriver says:

      Likely also a consideration on her part of wanting to show proper respect to the host country because, protocol. The elaborate earrings Meghan did wear were definitely way above her usual jewelry style, and I assumed she was given direction as to what level of jewelry was appropriate and shown a selection to chose from.

      Hard to say if it’s that the RR are avoiding the other issue, or if Meghan just hasn’t been visible, and everyone has to come up with something about her to keep the click numbers up until the baby is born.

    • bonobochick says:

      It’s so obvious, isn’t it, Becks1? More hit pieces about stupid stuff regarding DoS to hide a certain scandalous rumor.

      Lainey called this out too in a post today.

      • Mrs.Krabapple says:

        The intense criticism of Meghan and effusive praise of Kate over the last 6 months might be to cover up the meltdown of William’s marriage. I doubt the Sussexes appreciate that and it could cause rift between the brothers. But William is the future king so his wants will always come first.

    • Agenbiter says:

      Almost, right? lol
      Or avoiding a few issues with Andrew’s pal Epstein and the success of #GlobalSussexBabyShower. Plus is Charles afraid stories of William’s wandering are going to bring up bad memories after years of rebuilding his public image? At this point they all are looking bad except for H&M.

  12. Eleonor says:

    This is the look that to me required he hair up.

  13. Capepopsie says:

    I’m sure there is somekind of protocol for this,
    of which she may not have been aware.
    No big deal. 🤔

  14. Eliza says:

    The British royals almost never bring the tiaras out of the country. Kate has never worn one to a foreign state dinner and every tour they go on has a formal state dinner. The only lady in recent years, i can recall, to bring one outside of the UK is Sof at all the European royals white tie weddings- where dress code dictates crown. This is either complete BS. Or she didn’t know their protocol, asked and was told no, and it’s still no big deal because that’s how you learn.

    • Sisi says:

      well it’s Daily Mail, so it’s the former

    • Kerfuffle says:

      It depends on what event the hosts choose in the first place. If it’s black tie, it’s no tiara. If it’s white tie, it’s a tiara occasion.

      This particular reception in Fiji was black tie.

  15. HK9 says:

    Question, would Prince Charles be the one saying no, or would another member of staff have given her advice when she inquired? I’m a little surprised that Prince Charles would even care.

    • Ye says:

      When Megan asked Charles I’m sure he wouldnt have replied «I dont care!». They were probably chatting about the trip, and she asked what he thought about her maybe wearing a tiara.

      • HK9 says:

        I’m sure he didn’t say that, as they seem to have a good relationship and he would give her good advice. And I think saying no was the right call. For some reason, I don’t see him being an expert on tiaras but hey, you learn something new every day.

  16. Ira says:

    Meghan really doesn’t have friends in the BRF, no? It seems everyone want to deflect from her. Don’t expect things will be better once they move their court to BP.

    • Himmiefan says:

      She’s reportedly close to Camilla and Charles, and we’ve seen good interactions with the Queen, Anne, Anne’s husband, and Eugenie. So no, it’s not like she has no friends in the family.

      • Gail says:

        Agree completely. All these people are experts on royal protocol, and how would Meghan know without asking?
        She is stunning in this blue dress! I wish I could see those earrings better.

      • Ira says:

        There are so many conflicting reports. The courtiers seem very adamant to put her in her place (wherever the place is…). Do the courtiers have more power than Prince Charles and The Queen? If they’re not in cahoots with the courtiers, these bad campaign about Meghan never came out.

  17. Jb says:

    Sooo confirmed $500k on maternity clothes but thinking she’d ask to wear a tiara is crazy?! I think this jives

    • MissyS. says:

      Something being worth 500K doesn’t mean she spent that amount of money. I seriously doubt Charles would allow Meghan to have a clothing budget that large. My guess is that Meghan found a way to get those clothes for free or at a deeply discounted price. The numbers will be revealed this summer when the royal financial reports are released. Honestly, none of us know the truth. It is all gossip and speculation.

      • Tina says:

        There has never been a breakdown of the Duchy’s finances beyond an overall amount of what was spent on W, K, H (and now M), which was £5m in 2017-18.

    • Oh No says:

      I don’t think it’s the asking part that sounds crazy, it’s people making it seem like she threw tantrum over it. I could see her broaching the topic because she didn’t know the answer

    • Lolo says:

      @JB IKR? Unfortunately, the Saint Meg is Sussex, global humanitarian extraordinaire narrative doesn’t seem to leave much room for the idea that she might also enjoy the unlimited clothing budget and fabulous jewel collection that comes with the BRF. Amal Clooney is a very well-respected human rights barrister but that doesn’t mean that she doesn’t also frequently throw on a designer outfit and pap stroll her little heart out. People contain multitudes.

  18. Case says:

    She doesn’t strike me as someone who would demand a tiara, lol. I agree that she probably asked if she should or not, and was advised not to.

  19. Digital Unicorn says:

    It seems to me that she asked for advice, acted on it and is now being chucked under the bus to deflect from the Cambridge drama. And yet the Cambridge’s still have yet to say anything publicly defending Meghan – that will slap down stories painting Saint Kate as a mean girl but won’t defend their SIL from bullying and racism from the press. I thought they were firm supporters against bullying by the media? Guess not.

  20. Citresse says:

    She married the heir apparent’s brother, she is too low on the royal totem.

    • Ennie says:

      They were going on a royal tour, which is a big deal and not many lower ranked do. If this is real, I wonder who is leaking it. These stories damage more the image of the british crown than her, IMO. Saying “oh we have all this diamonds which we are keeping hidden (instead of giving some back to their original countries) because it makes us look bad and not modern” ugh.

    • Peg says:

      You would like to think so.

    • Himmiefan says:

      I don’t think so. She’s the daughter-in-law of the future king.

    • Citresse says:

      I thought someone should correct me…she married the brother of the heir to the heir apparent, sounds even lower…….MM is not the new Princess of Wales.

  21. Harryg says:

    I actually really like tiaras. (Er, not to wear one but the “look” of them.)
    Also, I don’ t think Charles gives a f what Meghan wears, unless it’s his own crown.

  22. magdalene says:

    Most of her jewelries are so small, she has not shown any penchant for big dazzling jewelries and yet these stories won’t stop.
    Kaiser you might be interested in looking into all the donations that have been done over the weekend to various organizations in the name of polo baby, under the hashtag #GlobalSussexBabyShower.

    • Peg says:

      She does wear small jewelry, the earrings at her evening reception and the ones with the blue dress are the biggest she has worn.
      Meghan loves her thumb ring, and thin rings worn on most of her fingers.
      This nonsense makes me laugh, it shows the tabloids don’t have any dirt on Meghan, so they have go with, she is demanding, want employees to actually work, the cost of her clothes, because the other members of the Royal family are walking around naked.
      They expected her suck up to the Toffs and media, so they could run with stories, but since she did not, it’s all this nick picking.

  23. Sash says:

    More nonsense. When is the royal baby due? It has to be soon!

  24. Mego says:

    The scapegoating continues. Surprise surprise. I see you Cambridges.

  25. Canadiangirl says:

    I believed the wedding tiara story, but I thought it was family squabbling and was between Harry and Eugenie. My guess is that Meghan was shown a few and chose one and then Eugenie saw it and threw a fit because she wanted it. She pulled rank as the queen’s grandchild and was given her way. Harry objected because he wanted Meghan’s wedding to be perfect and because he is used to being “above” Eugenie but Meghan isn’t (and we have heard other stories about those kind of infighting and rank pulling).

    But I also think the story was leaked by Andrew and so the Eugenie bit was left out so his daughter didn’t come across as a brat.

    • Peg says:

      why would the Queen show a tiara, if she was not going to allow it to be borrowed, she is not a child.
      People can believe what ever they want, two people can look at the same picture and interpret it two different ways.

      • Canadiangirl says:

        I think she was allowed to borrow it but Eugenie saw it after it had been chosen and pulled rank. But the story was leaked by Andrew so it’s not going to be told in a way that makes her look bad.

  26. Jessica says:

    Racists love little stories like this. It makes them feel like she’s being put in her place. Whatever. Dumb story.

    • Bren says:

      Yep, they feed off of anything that could be perceived as a slight against Meghan. Meanwhile, the queen continues to send Meghan out on multiple tours, passed down a charity for her to be a patron of and was officially named VP of the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust – all within her first year of being married in.

    • Royalwatcher says:

      Right?! Makes me wonder who’s spilling this nonsense.

  27. MissM says:

    Such a stupidstory. Royal watches knew from the start that this wasnt a tiara event so I promise that an actual member of the BRF would know too. The only possible explanation was that Meghan just asked “hey is this something that I need a tiara for?” And Charles told her “nope”.
    Also Meghan and harry did an audio recording for the wedding outfit display where Meghan said that the Queen presented her with a few tiaras to choose from and she loved Queen Mary’s tiara. That debunks the whole emerald tiara story.

  28. MarcelMarcel says:

    Assuming this story is true it boils down to Meghan wanting to wear a piece of jewellery, her father in law recommending that it wouldn’t be appropriate given the average income of Fiji and her accepting that advice? I don’t get why this is worth reporting on?

    Meghan is being criticised over nothing or something that applies to a lot of BRF members (ie the cost of her wardrobe). It just makes me believe there’s a cover up of silly Turnip Toff drama involving William.

  29. Lexa says:

    Uh, I know everyone is hot on the Nicole Cliffe theory, but this feels like another “Oh that Charles, he’s so understanding and knowledgeable, what a kindly father and future king” piece to me. I guess you can make a case that the timing is the point, but the press seems to be recycling stories and publishing nothingburgers like this for the click$ during her maternity leave. If the Cambridges had planted this as a distraction wouldn’t the insider have played up how demanding Meghan or cast her in a more negative light than simply not knowing it wasn’t a thing to wear a tiara to this kind of dinner? I’m not even sure this totally fits into a Hollywood Duchess of Excess angle.

    • Ksias says:

      I agree this screams a story from Charles’s camp to me. Ala Charles was there to guide the new Duchess in making the correct decisions on her highly successful tour.

    • Elisa says:

      +1 I’m literally scrolled down the comments to find a reference to Charles. That’s exactly how he wants to be perceived by the public.

      • Lolo says:

        Agreed! Plus this article basically says he’s in charge of foreign tours now (as opposed to his mother, the “her majesty” in “her majesty’s government” on whose behalf these tours are undertaken). Which further bolsters the regency argument that at this point he’s basically the only one making. This absolutely screamed Charles to me. It sure does make him seem like a real swell guy!

    • Becks1 says:

      So, I think this is a matter of the RRs needing to fill their columns with something besides William and Kate, so we have this story. The tour was a few months ago, the original wedding tiara story was also a few months ago – why is this being discussed now? My guess is the reporter had this little story for a while and it just finally got published. So I can believe that Charles leaked this (and it does sound like a Charles leak, I agree – he’s the knowledgeable senior royal, lending advice to the new American duchess) but that the actual timing is due to Will and Kate’s issues.

  30. DS9 says:

    This is such a non story on the level of gilary made Kate cry ish.

    “This tiara is available for your use.”

    “Do I need it for this big ass trip/BRF PR spree I’m going on?”

    “No, tiaras are white tie. Your schedule doesn’t have anything that formal.”

    “Okay, great.”

    “Do take these earrings though. You are a duchess and need some measure of sparkle.”

    Fin

  31. Raina says:

    I wish, no joke, my life boiled down to the drama of what tiara I would wear.
    I’D probably throw on a Yankees cap, extend both fingers, and call it a day.

  32. RedWeatherTiger says:

    She likely asked Charles, “Should I wear a tiara for this dinner? Is that appropriate?” And Charles advised her not to. And now, months later, they’re making it into a thing because the Marchioness of Cholmondeley has a big mouth.

    Bravo! This is it exactly!!

  33. efffefff says:

    So, Willy has definitely been swinging with the Chumley’s for months, right? That’s why were are getting these nothing stories today? To bury the Nicole Cliffe thread story?

  34. Mothra says:

    I find it exceptionally weird that a woman of colour who is well versed in the impacts of colonialism would demand to wear a sodding tiara in Fiji. This doesn’t make sense.

  35. SpilldatT says:

    I’m calling b.s. on this like most other dumb stories about Megs.

    And yes, if anything, she may have asked sometime like, “oh do I have to wear a tiara?” to make sure she didn’t NOT wear one if the occasion called for it as sometimes state affairs do, yes, even for overseas events. Not because she was like “I’m a princess, I’m going to wear a tiara every where!” which is what the story seems to want us to think is Meg’s mindset. Like, please stop with these nonsense stories.

  36. Casey02 says:

    It rained today…now look what Meghan did, she made it rain…just rolling my eyes at this article!!!

  37. Ain’tNoTelling says:

    I’m ordering a Tiara from Amazon, and will commence to tidy up my home while wearing it, once a week. 👑

  38. Lilly (with the double-L) says:

    Honestly, I thought this was an April Fool’s Day joke post, but *shrug* I’m astounded by photos of Meghan still, she always looks great. She would have pulled it off and either way works. As an outsider to royal ways, I’d be confused about whether a dinner is a tiara event or nah. Being told “no” would be fine. It really could go either way… a country might see it as “hey, we don’t merit some serious jewels?” or “hey, we’re pretty casual here, don’t wear serious jewels.” Prince Charles saying yay or nay is fine.

  39. jinvincible says:

    LOL. Some of these articles, whether true or not, just scream #RICHPEOPLEPROBLEMS. it’s quite funny how everything is made a big deal yet…… does it matter? lmao

  40. topsy says:

    Why doesn’t she just get ‘uppity negress’ tattooed on her forehead? Would everybody be happy then? It won’t change the fact that she’s beautiful or happy or married to a man who clearly loves her very much or that she’s getting ready to bring a child into the world. Or that she’s the Duchess of Sussex AND THEY AREN’T. But maybe it will calm the people who seem to have lost their minds since Harry took a second look at this woman. And then she and her husband and their baby can get the hell on with their lives.

  41. Mash says:

    mannnnnnnnnnnnn i knew she would encounter some racism….but LORDTTTY the british aristorcratic and I’m sure public /tabloids sure know to dagger it on….omg

    this is a story….she is about to be a new mom the love is there…. they met each other at their best selves, not being waity all their damn lives (kate and will)….im just so floored my all the persistent negative for this woman.
    but i shouldnt EVER be surprised really as a black woman, truly

  42. Lucylee says:

    She probably asked if this was an occasion to wear one of those tiaras filled with jewels looted from mineral rich countries around the world.