India is not happy about Queen Camilla’s plan to wear the Koh-i-noor diamond

Pretty much as soon as Queen Elizabeth II signed off, this year, on “Queen Consort Camilla,” royal sources began talking about how Camilla would wear the Queen Mother’s platinum and diamond consort crown, featuring 2,800 diamonds. One of those diamonds is the Koh-i-Noor, the 105-carat diamond stolen from India in the 19th century. India has wanted the Koh-i-Noor back for decades. The Indian government paid close attention to all of the stories this year about how Camilla would wear one of the most famous stolen (and cursed) diamonds in history. This week, a spokesperson for Indian PM Narendra Modi told British outlets:

“The coronation of Camilla and the use of the crown jewel Koh-i-noor brings back painful memories of the colonial past. Most Indians have very little memory of the oppressive past. Five to six generations of Indians suffered under multiple foreign rules for over five centuries. Recent occasions, like Queen Elizabeth II’s death, the coronation of the new Queen Camilla and the use of the Koh-i-noor does transport a few Indians back to the days of the British Empire in India.”

[From Sky News]

Yep. The Koh-i-Noor should be sent back to India, where it can be displayed in a museum. Send back all of the Indian treasure, the jewels and the art. Send back all of the looted antiquities, the gems, the spices and everything else. Hilariously, this discussion has become part of the backdrop of an ongoing trade negotiation between India and Britain. Even the Washington Post is calling out the Windsors’ bullsh-t.

The jewel in the British crown — literally — is coming under new scrutiny with the upcoming coronation of King Charles III and growing questions over what Camilla, Queen Consort, will wear on her head. The most famous jewel worn by British royalty on stately occasions, the spectacular 105-carat Koh-i-Noor diamond, is one that several countries, including India, say they would like back.

The British government on Thursday, responding to front-page stories claiming that Camilla may not wear the crown so as not to upset India, said that it was up to the palace to decide how the queen consort’s crown should be decorated. Buckingham Palace declined to comment.

India — with which Britain would very much like to conclude a trade agreement — has repeatedly demanded the return of the diamond, especially following Elizabeth’s funeral.

Rakesh Sinha, a lawmaker from the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, told The Washington Post that the Koh-i-Noor symbolized the monarchy’s “unapologetic” link to a past that was “barbaric and exploitative,” adding that the jewel must be returned to India by way of recompense.

If Camilla wears the Koh-i-Noor in her crown, it “shows the British people and government are carrying the legacy of their colonialism,” he said. “It exhibits the loot plunder and exploitation of India by them. The most regretful is they are not ready to correct their past and showing off the stolen jewel as the part of their sovereign seat.”

“Every person in India has heard of this stone and wants it back. Clearly this is massive importance to India, but also Pakistan, Bangladesh, Iran, Afghanistan,” said William Dalrymple, co-author of “Kohinoor: The History of the World’s Most Infamous Diamond.” Most British people, however, are barely aware of it, in part because teaching about the British Empire doesn’t feature prominently in school curriculums, said the author, who splits his time between Britain and India.

“They learn about the Roman empire, all sorts of empires, but not the British Empire,” Dalrymple said. “For them, the Koh-i-Noor is usually a local Indian restaurant or a brand of pencils or occasionally a trip to the Tower of London.”

The crown controversy comes at a time when Britain and India are engaged in trade talks, which are of great interest to post-Brexit Britain. Both sides in April said they wanted to conclude talks by the Indian holiday of Diwali on Oct. 24. But there have been reports that the talks have run into problems after British Home Secretary Suella Braverman — herself a child of immigrants — expressed concerns about what the deal would mean for migration, considering that “the largest group of people who overstay are Indian migrants.”

Dalrymple, the author, said that “the British, post-Brexit, are keen to make friends with India, at the same time India is getting more and more hyper sensitive about its colonial past.” He said it would be a “very well-received gesture not to wear” the diamond at the coronation and an “even better-received gesture to give it back.”

[From WaPo]

“The largest group of people who overstay are Indian migrants” – y’all know who overstayed in India throughout history? British colonizers. They overstayed for centuries. Anyway, I hope India demands that this trade deal be conditional on the Koh-i-Noor. I can already see that British people think they’re being slick, asking all pseudo-innocently, “but which country should we return it to?” You return it to India. It doesn’t belong to you, you don’t get to dictate who possesses it or exhibits it in museums.

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Getty, Avalon Red, Cover Images.

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

117 Responses to “India is not happy about Queen Camilla’s plan to wear the Koh-i-noor diamond”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Dee says:

    Diamonds can’t save that face from dalmatian, if you get what I mean. I’m here all day!

    • The Old Chick says:

      The horse pic never gets old. Have another g and t, Camilla. After what we now know she did to Diana, the only thing I wish for her is karma

    • Selene says:

      Camilla has the weirdest smile, like she’s holding herself back and not wanting to, but having to.

      • Snoodle says:

        Yes, that would probably be the result of the weird emotional constipation of the British aristocracy. Actually feeling a genuine emotion and expressing it is so dreadfully common, you know?

    • Mercy says:

      Anyone notice the horse’s ears are straight flat back when Camilla is petting it? It’s a sign that the horse is straight up angry and uncomfortable and could very well try to bolt.

      • FarFromRealTV says:

        @Mercy the horse sure ain’t happy. Odd given that we all know what a horsewoman she is.

  2. Cessily says:

    Britain is desperate for trade deals also, India has not signed one with them and I hope they don’t until all the stolen items are returned especially this diamond.

    • Snuffles says:

      I’m no economist, but what would happen in the UK if they don’t get any trade deal? Would supply be cut off or would supply still be available with the price of goods skyrocketing?

      • LizzieB says:

        They would revert to the terms of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) so trade would still occur but at less-good terms than both sides would like to negotiate.

      • Karla says:

        Well Boris Johnson seemed to think that the WTO Terms were quite alright when negotiating Brexit with the EU;-)

    • MakeEverydayCount says:

      Agreed. Britain has placed a trade deal with India above all including one with the USA. The Brits must come to realization that they are NOT a global power anymore instead they are a tiny salty Island desperately holding on to a time that has gone by.

      • Jan says:

        Britain comes behind the E U in trade deals with the USA, and if they mess with the Good Friday Deal, Biden will not be a happy camper.

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Jan, oh, yes. This has been a sticking point with Biden. It’s not even that difficult. The UK just needs to live up to their end of the bargain. Do they realize that if they don’t, why would anyone think they will live up to other bargains they’ve made?

    • ELX says:

      The Indian government wants essentially visa-free travel for Uber-35s—I don’t think they will get a deal done. Plus, nowadays, who really wants to come to a country on the verge of bankruptcy.

    • Josephine says:

      Is it because of Brexit that they have no trade deals? If so, hope they continue to struggle so that their racism with Brexit actually hurts them.

      If they wanted to be a modern monarchy, they could start by returning national traesures to the countries to which they belong.

    • Cessily says:

      At this point and because of Brexit the British need these trade deals with other countries a lot more than the other countries need trade deals with Britain. I believe they only currently have a trade deal with Australia which was far more favorable to the Australians than to Britain itself. When they pulled out of the EU it nullified all trade deals that were made because those were done with the EU as a whole and not the individual countries. The Monarchy and it’s bloody racist colonial past needs to address their history. It is not looking very good for Britains financial future with this King and his Tory cronies. The stolen wealth should be returned and the past needs to be addressed.

      • Emme says:

        @Cessily, not strictly true. Since Brexit the UK has signed trade deals and agreements in principle with 71 countries and one with the EU itself. The majority of these were “rollover”, ie the same deals UK had when still an EU member.
        Independent deals have been done with New Zealand, Australia, Japan, Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein. Talks with India only started this year. The UK has also applied to join an existing trade agreement with 11 Pacific Rim nations (CPTPP.)

      • Cessily says:

        I only read about the Australian agreement in the USA, but you are right they have more than that but your numbers are off. Only 41 agreement have been fully ratified the others are only provisional.
        My source:
        https://www.gov.uk/guidance/uk-trade-agreements-with-non-eu-countries

        They still have a lot of trade and border issues with the EU.

      • Emme says:

        @Cessily, I did say “trade deals and agreements IN PRINCIPLE with 71 countries…”

    • DouchesOfCambridge says:

      That coronation day is gonna be whack and the backlash on the intl press will be bonkers. They’ll wish Lizzy would still be there

    • FarFromRealTV says:

      Once again a monumental cock up from the gang that can’t shoot straight. Who knew Charles and co would be so tragically entertaining.

  3. Flowerlake says:

    Thank you for writing about this and spreading knowledge.

    This is a story of an Englishman that did return artifacts stolen by an earlier generation of his family:

    https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-31605284

    Seeing all this art makes it clear that there were a lot of civilizations that were way more advanced than they were often portrayed (portrayed that way to justify colonialism). It would be great if more people spread knowledge about the history of all the many civilizations that existed and not just the few.

    • Flowerlake says:

      If anyone can give me any tips of historical figures or civilizations to look up because they deserve more attention, please write them below.

      To stay on the topic of India, I suggest: Lakshmibai, the Rani of Jhansi.

      • Becks1 says:

        not about a specific civilization, but I just read this book called “Four Lost Cities: A Secret History of the Urban Age” by Annalee Newitz and it was FASCINATING. they’re more a sociologist than an archaeologist or anthropologist so they visited these four cities from millenia ago – Çatalhüyük (in modern Turkey), Pompeii (Italy), Angkor (Cambodia) and Cahokia (Mississippi River, close to modern day St. Louis.) The book talks about what the cities were like and why they were abandoned and overall it was really interesting bc of the technology that went into building the cities and what might have led to their eventual abandonments (I mean for Pompeii we know lol but that was still interesting.)

        John Oliver also had a segment a few weeks ago about countries like the UK looting other countries for centuries and how they won’t return the art and artifacts, and he referenced this book Loot by Barnaby Phillips about the Benin Bronzes and I’m going to read that at some point in the near future.

      • Jaded says:

        @Flowerlake — you may want to look up some of the pre-Columbian civilizations, like the Inca, Aztec, Mayan and Olmec peoples. They had very advanced cultures, farming and building methods, the Maya invented a very sophisticated calendar and charted astronomical movements of the planets, sun and moon.

      • Flowerlake says:

        Becks1 and Jaded, thank you very much for your suggestions.

        Becks1, that sounds like an amazing book! So interesting, especially to see what people did similarly and differently to each other. Never heard about C ahokia before.

        I know very little about the Olmec civilization . This weekend I will read up on them more. Not saying I know all that much about the other three you mentioned, as I usually focus on Africa, Asia and Europe. You’re right. I should learn more 🙂

      • ArtHistorian says:

        @Becks1

        “Four Lost Cities” is an amazing book! I can recommend the book about the Koh-i-Noor that William Dalrymple wrote with Anita Anand. It is a very detailed history of the diamond, pre- and post-British colonialization. They also have a very good podcast called Empire – where they recently had a series of eps about the Koh-in-Noor.

      • Alarmjaguar says:

        @FlowerLake- if you are ever in St. Louis, MO, you can visit Cahokia. It is just across the Mississippi River to the east- the main temple mound is still there (and huge) along with some smaller ones and. Visitor Center. If you are closer to Birmingham, AL, check out Moundville, a similarly impressive site! Not to mention World Heritage site, Chaco Canyon in NM or the amazing Mesa Verde, CO, with massive apartment buildings. It is a travesty that children in the US aren’t taught about these incredible urban sites from pre-European contact in North America.

    • NotTheOne says:

      Thanks for sharing this. What we’ve been told is our “right” to have is actually straight up theft.

      • Jay says:

        @Flowerlake, you might try listening to the podcast “Stuff the British Stole”, produced by an Australian broadcaster. It has some fascinating stories of stolen artifacts, tracing their histories and what they represent.

      • Flowerlake says:

        Thanks, Jay!

        I’ll look it up. Still need to catch up on this week’s Meghan podcast, so might do it all in one go.

    • The Recluse says:

      I would also recommend 1491: The Americas Before Columbus. It is eye-opening.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Fascinating article. Thanks!

  4. Margaret says:

    As much as I like Camilla, I believe it would be very wrong of her to wear the Koh-i-Noor. That diamond should be returned to India and not ever worn again by one of the British royals.

    • Cerys says:

      I agree. I like Camilla too which is not a popular view to have. The diamond should be returned to India along with any other stolen property from the empire period. There are several other lovely and less controversial crowns that Camilla can use.

    • Renae says:

      If the stone is cursed (think Hope diamond), I want Camilla to wear the h*ll out of it. Please, wear it to bed. And don’t take it off for weeks.,……….then, give it back!

  5. Jttrain says:

    If Charles wanted to give it back, he would have already. It would have benefitted him immensely. However, Camilla will be Queen! (said like a petulant child stomping a foot down). But it doesn’t matter. She can’t wear it and Charles hates to not get his way.

  6. equality says:

    How is not wearing it a gesture of goodwill as long as they still possess it? Only returning it counts.

    • ML says:

      Well said, @ Equality. “If Cam can’t wear it, you can’t have it,” is not the argument KC thinks it is.

    • Gabby says:

      When a thief steals something from you, it should make you feel better to know they aren’t using it. 🙂

    • MaryContrary says:

      This. Seriously nonsensical or like dealing with a small child.

    • Christine says:

      THIS.

    • Margaret says:

      Baby steps. Ideally the Koh-i-Noor should be returned to its rightful owner now, however I believe it would at least be a step in the right direction in the moral continuum of human affairs if the UK refrained from flaunting this particular bauble at Charles’ coronation. The Consort’s Crown was made for the coronation of the last Emperor of India. Surely there are plenty of other shiny things in the royal vault that could be used to make a new crown, and chunks of gold that could be melted down to fashion a more modern Consort’s crown to set them in.

  7. Chaine says:

    I hope that crown topples off her budget Farrah Fawcett wig on live tv.

  8. Amy Bee says:

    I love this for the Royal Family.

  9. Sophie says:

    I don’t think for a second that the British will ever return the Koh-i-Noor diamond! Nor will they return the Parthenon sculptures or the Egyptian treasures or anything else that they have stolen from various countries throughout history! They will just sweep all these under the carpet and pray that no-one will remember…
    As for Horseface, well, as they say, an image is worth a thousand words!

    • Shawna says:

      Seeing the Elgin marbles just made me profoundly sad. Really ruined my visit to the British Museum.

      • LightPurple says:

        My tenant, who is Bangladeshi, just visited the British Museum and made a half hour video of himself standing in front of objects saying “Stolen loot! Give it back!”

      • Janey says:

        I recently took my 10 year old son to London and he wanted (amongst other things) to see the crown jewels. I may have ruined it for him by lecturing him on colonialism and stolen diamonds and the redistribution of wealth.

      • Kiera says:

        The Elgin Marbles make me so mad! I read a great historical fiction book years ago called Stealing Athena and it was about the Elgin Marbles from his wife’s perspective. The author did a great job and I fact checked the book and it is incredibly accurate as to what happened.

        Elgin was an awful person and he had no real legal right to take the marbles. Greece was an occupied country at the time and had an active resistance against the Ottomans. His paperwork from the Ottomans was bribed at best, forged most likely. The marbles only belong to England because Elgin had to sell them to them for financial reasons. He had intended to use them to decorate his house…….

        Return the Marbles!!!

      • ThatsNotOkay says:

        10 is just about the right age to begin bursting bubbles. Now you’ll have an empathetic, intelligent, erudite, principled lad you can be forever proud of. Good mum!

      • LizzieB says:

        I actually think that the BM will return the Elgin Marbles in my lifetime – there were recent noises about how this might happen from various sides and there’s been an nearly empty museum in Athens for over 20 years waiting for them so the argument that Greece can’t look after them is null and void. I think they are more likely than the Royal Family giving up any jewels.

      • C says:

        Look up the British Museum Act of 1963 which forbids the return of items in the British Museum. In 2005 this law was cited as precedent for not returning Nazi-looted art. It would need an act of Parliament to change, which I doubt they will do. It’s ridiculous.

      • Becks1 says:

        @C that’s so enraging and just so…..colonialist or imperialist, I guess. “We’re going to pass a law that says we can’t return the things we stole from you that we have in our museum! Sorry, otherwise we would totes return everything but we can’t, its illegal!”

      • Christine says:

        Wow, C! Thank you for that, I had no idea.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Shawna, the Elgin Marbles are why I was so surprised to see the Clooneys (but mostly Amal, I think? Doesn’t she have some honorary position granted to her by Charles?) cozying up to Chuck over the past few years, making significant contributions to The Prince’s Trust, etc.

        Because up until 2015, Amal was one of the attorneys working on behalf of Greece— I believe she was lobbying for the Greek government to sue the British government for the return of the Marbles?— I don’t remember details, but it seems like a giant conflict of interest…back then, she didn’t seem like someone who would be dying to get the BRF’s stamp of approval or hoping to be made a Dame someday or whatever.

        It’s hard to reconcile her lobbying for the return of the Elgin Marbles, but then turning around and getting as close to the BRF as she could? It isn’t as if she’s unaware of the history here. Who knows ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    • Miss Owlsyn says:

      Insert meme tweet here:

      “What’s something that feels British but isn’t?”

      “The contents of the British Museum.”

      • lanne says:

        What’s worse is that the British museum only displays about 1% of its holdings. So there are a lot of treasures gathering dust in boxes that they don’t want to return to their rightful places, where they could be displayed and cared for.

    • SenseOfTheAbsurd says:

      Nope, they’ll hang on like grim death. With the koh-i-noor, can see the thing causing further trouble if given back, because originally acquired in dodgy coercive treaty settlement under highly murky circumstances with a kingdom which a) no longer exists; and b) is now geographically part of Pakistan. Jewels like that bring out the absolute worst in people, and greed brings bloodshed, nothing to do with any curse. Best thing for it would probably be to drop it overboard into the deepest ocean, and pay reparations for colonisation in some more useful currency, like hospitals and infrastructure to benefit everybody.

      One that makes me really angry is refusal by British Museum to return the Rapa Nui statue, despite a long campaign by the islanders to repatriate it. Its name translates as ‘our stolen friend’.

      • TEALIEF says:

        They are the Parthenon Marbles. They belong to and are integral to the most acclaimed of Greek temples, the Parthenon. Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin is a looter and a temple thief. The British Museum and Tower of London are repositories what is, for most part, stolen and of suspect provenance. All museums are suspect.

  10. Veda says:

    The loot of India’s temple artefacts, deities and temple jewelry is one of the most painful legacies of the British empire. These are priceless and irreplaceable- they are thousands of years of our heritage and culture, which are “displayed” as showpieces in that chor bazaars (thieves’ store) called the British Museum and Tower of London. Britain has no business retaining any of it. My wish would be for the Government of India to establish a multilateral record, reparation and repatriation committee that actively works for repatriation of stolen artefacts.

    • Jasper says:

      It just upsets me how much was looted from every country they set foot in. Every. Single. Country. And to this day all we get are some half hearted “acknowledgements” of the wrongs done but no real recompense. And most of the time what was stolen was irreparably changed to make it more “aesthetically pleasing” for the British gaze or damaged to facilitate the theft.

      • Elsa says:

        It was heartbreaking to go to a museum in Lesotho – most of the exhibits are pictures of things in the British Museum.

      • antipodean says:

        Absolutely right Jasper….Every Bloody Country they invaded, in the larcenous search for “artifacts”, which were looted and sold in the name of “civilisation”. Reference the shrunken Maori chief heads, which were VERY reluctantly repatriated, but many of which are still stored in the dusty basements of the “British Museum”! These heads are revered by their ancestors, and still retain the mana they had when they were snatched from their tribes, and taken back to Britain to be displayed as “curiosities”. The so-called British Empire has a lot to answer for, and is covered in shame. T’was ever thus.

  11. C-Shell says:

    I’ve got nothing to add to Kaiser’s righteous indignation about the Windsor’s and British government’s willful racism and colonialism, in general, but especially in this instance. I think the comment that made me grind my teeth the most was that Indian migrants “overstay” the most. 🤬 ORLY?!

    PS – sublime photo array, as usual

    • SarahCS says:

      The tories and right-wing press just can’t help themselves, the racism isn’t even hidden these days. This is what happens when you put nationalism first and we get nonsense like Brexit. They just keep doubling down harder on the idea of them and us and all the nasty foreigners (who we also desperately need to do trade deals with thanks to cutting ourselves off from Europe). It’s a mess.

    • LizzieB says:

      Suella Braverman can get in the bin. Due to Brexit, EU migration fell but Commonwealth migration increased, which the right wing Tories hate. It’s actually really interesting to watch Brexiteers unable to square the circle of ‘fewer migrants means no one to be nurses, care workers and hospitality workers’ – to deliver on economic promises, Businesses are pressuring the government to open up movement which goes directly against the hardline Brexiteer desires. On the other hand, they are probably happy for Commonwealth countries to remove the King as Head of State as the Tories then have a reason to close migration routes. So… basically everyone is screwed here in the UK, one way or another!

    • SIde Eye says:

      Me too @ C-Shell it was perfectly written. These colonizers are disgusting. I wish I could say this surprises me but these people were paying reparations to families that owned slaves up until recently. They are so vile. They are never, ever returning that diamond – it’s their pride a joy and a symbol of that their trifling colonizing asses “won” and subdued Indians. They don’t get it.

      • Fortuona says:

        No they were not .

        In 1833 HMG took out massive loans to pay of all the slaves owners and it was the debt on the loans that was paid off 10 years ago

        Like we are still paying for WWI and WWII on the national debt

        As for the diamond who should get it as the Iranians claim it since they stole it first and have its sister, Pakistan claim it since they stole it next and Britain bought it from Duleep Singh the ruler of Kashmir under a Treaty

      • Mooney says:

        Fortuona, it was not gifted under some treaty. Dileep Singh was the son the great ruler Maharaja ranjeet singh, but he was a minor when his father died and so he was under the control of Brits who sent him to Britain, spoilt him and made him a puppet ruler. So that treaty or gift was under duress, not willingly.

  12. Bettyrose says:

    Would it be easier to start counting the Commonwealth nations Charles and Cam haven’t pissed off?

  13. Becks1 says:

    they’re not going to return it. At MOST they’ll put it on permanent display with the Crown Jewels in the Tower of London or they’ll move it to the British Museum or BP or something as a permanent exhibit, but they’re not going to return it.

    first off, can Charles even return it? Its part of the crown jewels, can he just say “here you go, take this back?” Do the crown jewels belong to him or to The Crown, you know? I’m not sure how it would work.

    Second, because there is some dispute as to which country should get it, charles (or the government in general) is going to hide behind that as a reason to keep it, hence the museum exhibit or whatever. “well we don’t want to start a war over it, so we’ll just keep it so you all don’t have to worry about it.” It’s kind of the whole idea behind the British museum, right? “we can take care of this better than you.”

    Third – and I think this is the biggest reason – if they start with the Koh-i-Noor, then what’s next? Are other countries going to want back THEIR stolen diamonds, art, artifacts?? WHERE DOES IT END?????

    (my last part is sort of sarcastic, sort of not. Britain wouldn’t be in this situation if they weren’t looting from other countries regularly as part of their colonialism and empire building.)

    • lucy2 says:

      Wearing that particular one would be so incredibly tone deaf and offensive.
      I can’t see the BRF ever giving it back, because it would open the door to all the other stuff they shouldn’t have, and I’m sure they don’t want to set a precedent. It should be given back, but they won’t.

    • Mooney says:

      @Becks the diamond belongs to India. It was found in the Golconda mines, near Hyderabad which falls in the south India. So any other country has no claim over it. Even if Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan demand it because they were once part of the Indian subcontinent, they’re not now. They’re independent countries now. So they have no claim now.

      • Fortuona says:

        Demand it’s sister back as it sits in Tehran

      • Becks1 says:

        I believe you and that’s my thinking (that it belongs to India) but I’m more just saying that as long as the UK can say “well there’s some dispute” it gives them cover for keeping it, you know?

    • Mel says:

      I think it should be given back, but since they aren’t really “personal” items, the jewelry belongs to “The Crown”, who decides where they go? Does the government have to step in? I know that here that the President and their families can keep items under a certain dollar value. Everything else goes into bank of gifts that the government keeps and future Presidents and their families have access to it. Is that how things that belong to the Crown works? I’ m curious.

  14. Beverley says:

    Yikes! Camilla is so homely not even a dazzling, stolen blood diamond can make her look good. What an unfortunate face!

    • Lorelei says:

      It’s really true! 😂 If that diamond can’t help her, nothing can.
      She is beyond unfortunate looking.

  15. Tessa says:

    Maybe Charles promised her she could wear it. Let’s see how this plays out.

  16. Brassy Rebel says:

    The Windsors talk a good game about changing. At the end of the day it’s just gaslighting. Why do they still have any of these stolen antiquities and gemstones?

  17. aquarius64 says:

    The Windsors better find a way to give the diamond back because if that trade deal blows up over this the government will see to it the BRF takes the fall.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      aquarius64, perhaps the government should change the law stating that no ill gotten goods can be returned. I think that’s what people in the UK should be reminding everyone of.

  18. Nev says:

    The absolute gall. This ho.

  19. Michelle Connolly says:

    They won’t give it back. They may – may – just put it on display somewhere, but they won’t give it back. The British are completely wilfully ignorant of their coloniser past. See also this week the sports commentator reaming out the captain of Ireland’s football team for a chant they sang. Fine, perhaps they shouldn’t have sang it. But the Colonial-splaining when he said ‘maybe it should be an opportunity to educate yourself’ was just beyond. Go educate yourself, mister. And maybe translate what our Irish national anthem says while you’re at it and see how we really feel.

  20. Colby says:

    I fell down this rabbit hole last night. There are a lot of articles out there saying how offensive it would be for her to wear it, so one *hopes* their team would get the hint…but as we know they are the worst

    I like Queen Mary’s crown and that would be my choice. It has a replica of the Koh-I-noor and IMO is absolutely beautiful

  21. Emily says:

    Camila could wear any other crown. Yet , the RF will choose vanity over doing the right thing. God forbid they even hint at colonization as wrong.

  22. Miss Owlsyn says:

    “y’all know who overstayed in India throughout history? British colonizers.”

    I know this is a very serious subject but daaaaamn Kaiser. Drop the mic after that sentence.

    Beautifully and hilariously stated.

  23. Murphy says:

    I doubt Camilla herself actually wants to wear it, it would be very difficult with her osteoporosis so maybe they’ll use that as an excuse for her to not wear it,

    • Becks1 says:

      I also would not be surprised if she shows up at the coronation with a brand new crown or tiara that Charles buys for her.

  24. Seraphina says:

    If Camilla wears it, it “shows the British people and government are carrying the legacy of their colonialism,” he said. “It exhibits the loot plunder and exploitation of India by them. The most regretful is they are not ready to correct their past and showing off the stolen jewel as the part of their sovereign seat.”

    DAAAAAMN. I stand and applaud that statement and I could not agree more!!!!

  25. Miss Jupitero says:

    Oh dear God, this thread makes me happy. Everybody posting: thank you, thank you. I am loving every bit of this. Thank you especially for all the details. Seraphima: me too!!

    If Camilla wears that crown, if it is not returned asap, along with all other stolen loot, the RF and GB will deserve all of the shit that will rightly come down upon them. For starters.

  26. Likeyoucare says:

    I hope everytime the courtiers leak about the crown that camilla and kate want to wear : all the countries that had been looted to make the crowns will make a big wave to make them return the diamonds.
    And make sure non of the jeweleries are given by arabs too.
    All the new clothes prices will be counted down to the shoes and fake wigs.
    They need to experience what meghan feel when she was terorize by the rotas and british medias

  27. Mooney says:

    Thank god finally someone else from the government said something about this officially. This year in independence day speech, PM Modi ji said about decolonisation totally. Before this, they have always been diplomatic about Kohinoor issue.

    And no, only India has the claim over Kohinoor because Golconda mines, where it was found,falls in South India, not Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

    Recently, India surpassed Britain as the fifth largest economy and their Home minister, another brown sepoy (Yes, I’m proud of the empire, they gave us military, education, etc), has the gall to insult Indians. Good luck with getting a trade deal.

    Fun fact, I recently read a study that the ownership of British lands in order of nationality,is as follows:
    1. Indians
    2. British
    3. Pakistani.
    Good luck Salt Island.

  28. Chantal says:

    Appreciate all the comments. As usual, very educational. The US has whitewashed much of our history so I understand.
    C-Rex, the govt et al do the right thing? Not bl**dy likely! They won’t even do right by the white Commonwealth nations and barely acknowledge the Black and Brown ones…

  29. Maxine Branch says:

    I hope the Sussexes attend the Coronation. I also hope they get there the day before and leave the day after. Other then friends and patronage’s, there is nothing left for them there, because the media is still unleashed and the royal gossipers are still unhinged. Many of us have had to do things for family members because it is the right thing to do not because we were invested in the outcome.

  30. Pam says:

    I agree that all the loot and plunder should be sent back to their perspective countries. However, that would be highly entertaining, as what would be left? 🤣🤣🤣

    • MY3CENTS says:

      Wiglets and a box of buttons?
      Yeah, they’d have to downsize the British Museum for sure.

  31. ME says:

    LOL I’m so glad curry is now the national dish of England ! I nice big F.U. for what they did to Indians. Raped our women, killed our men, kept us as slaves…stole our most prized possessions. What is there to be proud of?

  32. Emily_C says:

    This concern about who to give it back to — “Oh noes but you can’t possibly handle this shiny on your own! You know how you get. You sillies can’t be trusted to play nice. We had better hang on to it for you. You’re welcome.”

  33. MY3CENTS says:

    #returnstolenloot
    All of it.
    Hope this coronation goes the way the flop tour went with more and more countries demanding their stolen art and artifacts back.

  34. Peanut Butter says:

    It’s obscene how the BRF cling to the precious rarities they looted. What a magnificent thing if Charles demonstrated the dignity and decency to return the Koh-i-Noor and other stolen artifacts with full-throated apologies (same for all other imperialist countries). But I don’t think Charles can muster the moral strength to do so, though I’d love to see him prove me dead wrong.

  35. MerryGirl says:

    Don’t stop at the Kor-i-Noor. Give back the Culligan ‘Star of Africa’ to South Africa, give back the Benin artifacts and all the stolen loot from places they brutalized and colonized back to their rightful owners.

    • Karla says:

      Berlin gave back the Benin Bronze to Nigeria in August 2022. Currently a third of them are lent back to Berlin by the Nigerian state to the Humboldt Forum as Part of an exhibition. A Nigerian art historian curated the exposition together with the Humboldt Forum in Order to Start to process the colonial past, it‘s problematic, the repercussions etc. It was big in the news in Germany. It‘s only a start and discussions on giving back Nefertiti e.g. will follow for sure.

  36. BeanieBean says:

    Had no idea about the special legislation created just for the BM so that they don’t have to repatriate anything (well, somebody did mention it in the past week but it was the first I had heard). That is quite amazing & galling. Other museums in England are willing to cooperate, e.g., from Cambridge: https://www.oha.org/news/group-of-native-hawaiians-to-bring-home-iwi-kupuna-housed-at-english-institution-for-over-a-century/
    (FYI–a friend’s husband was part of the group who traveled over to retrieve the iwi kūpuna .)

  37. Isabella says:

    Does anybody know when it was worn last? I can’t see Camilla wearing anything that big and gaudy. I don’t know who could pull it off.

  38. bisynaptic says:

    At the rate the Liz Truss version of the Tories is going, pretty soon they’re going to have to sell the damned thing.

  39. LovelyRita says:

    I just want to say that this thread has been so illuminating and helpful. My contribution is that I’m highly intuitive and my sense is that all of this is going to be a rude and karmically just awakening, with some dark days ahead for KC and his “sunshine” band. Diana is watching it all as well; she knew what we’re about to see.

    • Jaded says:

      I think your intuition is spot on. It feels sort of like a huge, dark storm is brewing. Between the utter ineptness of KC3 and his dolt of a son and daughter-in-law (not the Montecito ones), plus the economic melt-down Liz Truss is creating, poor old salty isle isn’t going to fare well in the coming months/years.

  40. JRenee says:

    This is the same family that “owns” gifts that are given to the individual family members if it’s over X value. They then pass it along from Sovereign to Sovereign tax free. They have a lot of privilege and financial advantages, they won’t give anything up without force…

  41. JD says:

    I’m glad that horse’s arse wants to put that crown on that horse’s head, otherwise he wouldn’t have raised so much awareness about how much stuff England has stolen over the years… And I truly hope all of those things go back to their rightful owners.

  42. MicMack says:

    Not to be a stick in the mud about it, but how exactly was this particular diamond stolen? I’m familiar with the history regarding India and the nature of the British museum (which also houses stolen Irish artifacts that no one cares about, I presume because we are European and no one remembers we were colonized by Britain for 700+ years, nearly purposely erasing Irish Gaelic language in the process) My memory could be completely wrong on this but I thought an India has about as much or less claim on this specific diamond as Afghanistan, Pakistan, or Iran.