Princess Kate wears cheap jewelry because of the ‘cost of living crisis,’ okay??

You guys, the Princess of Wales had to break away from her summer holiday to bark orders at Kensington Palace staff and some friendly royal reporters. Kate and Carole must have been highly upset over Suzy Menkes comments this week about Kate’s lack of joy in wearing major Royal Collection jewelry. Menkes was obviously Team Camilla, and the whole thing read like Camilla flaunting the fact that she gets to decide what Royal Collection pieces Kate gets to borrow. But I also thought there was a grain of truth to Menkes’ words, in that Kate doesn’t know how to accessorize or wear the right jewelry for the right event with the right ensemble. Kate never learned, Carole never learned and so Kate still wears jewelry like a middle-class university student who never inherited any heirloom pieces (which is only biting commentary if you’re a British aristocrat, which is what Kate is trying to emulate). Anyway, Kate must have been really upset about Menkes’ comments, because this Telegraph piece was organized swiftly. It’s basically a long-winded commentary piece about how it’s great that Kate wears cheap jewelry and can’t accessorize her way out of a paper bag because… reasons! Some highlights:

Kate’s jewelry strategy: On many occasions we’ve seen the Princess enjoy wearing the kind of costume jewellery pieces that the rest of us might buy on the high street…Some of the reasons for this preference for costume jewellery are obvious: we’re in the midst of a cost of living crisis; it would read a bit brash to wear a £300,000 pair of diamond earrings to visit a hospice or a baby bank. And in wearing jewellery that – while not always “cheap” – is more accessible to the likes of you and I, she appears more relatable.

Kate wears jewelry like any other British woman: The Princess wears jewellery in the same way most other British women do, says Marisa Hordern, founder and CEO of Missoma, one of the Princess’s go-to jewellery brands. The most important factors are comfort and confidence. “Whether it’s fine, demi-fine or costume jewellery, what you wear reflects how you feel and what you want to project – and the Princess of Wales shows us time and time again how to wear all three seamlessly and effortlessly.”

Jewelry provenance is only tricky when you’re Black! There could be a more sensitive issue at play. The provenance of jewellery can be a thorny issue for royals – as we saw when the Duchess of Sussex wore a pair of diamond earrings during the Royal Tour of New Zealand, Fiji and Tonga in 2018. Palace aides initially claimed that the earrings were “borrowed”, but it later emerged that they were a gift from Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, who is accused of ordering the assassination of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Ethical questions aside, gifts from other heads of state remain the property of the Crown, not the recipient….Kate and her longtime assistant-stylist Natasha Archer are likely being very careful that she doesn’t wear jewellery that might raise awkward questions.

An awkward way to say Kate doesn’t have access to most jewelry: So who gets to wear the royal jewels? It’s not as simple as rifling through the vaults and picking your favourites. The Crown owns most of them, and pieces are loaned out to other royals with the permission of the monarch. This can be on a long-term or lifetime basis, with the piece returned to the Crown on their death. There is a lot of tact that goes into the decisions about who wears what, too. The Princess of Wales often wears pieces which were worn and loved by Princess Diana, but it would be inappropriate for the Queen to do so. Instead, she often chooses pieces that were worn by the Queen Mother.

Lack of occasion: The biggest hurdle for Kate and the Queen in wearing these royal jewels is the lack of occasion, which has steadily been declining since the Second World War. Lauren Kiehna, the writer and historian behind The Court Jeweller blog, recognises this, too. “There are fewer opportunities for that kind of grandeur,” she says. “There’s a need to match attire to the occasion, and Kate seems to wear more affordable jewellery pieces, often from local or sustainable brands, when the moment calls for more accessibility. Both Camilla and Kate have started delving more into the vaults since the late Queen’s passing, and I expect that we’ll see more important pieces making appearances on both of them in time. But, sadly, the days of wearing important antique jewels on a daily basis appear to be over.”

Kate is keen to build her own collection: “Catherine has a very sensitive and modern approach to jewellery,” says Bethan Holt, author of The Duchess of Cambridge: A Decade of Modern Royal Style, and The Telegraph’s fashion director. “I think that she’s wanting to carve her own path within the Royal family. Although there are some incredible pieces within the Royal family vaults, I think she’s been very keen to build her own collection, using pieces from the high street and pieces from modern jewellers like Kiki McDonough as well… Which I believe often have been given to her by Prince William to mark special occasions.”

[From The Telegraph]

Do you want me to get into it? I will. The “lack of occasion” argument bugs me, because there have been plenty of occasions where it would have been entirely reasonable for Kate to borrow a tiara or a big necklace or major earrings and she just hasn’t or she was blocked from doing so. The coronation is the most obvious example – you can argue “the cost of living crisis” until you’re blue in the face, but Kate still chose to get those fruity custom headpieces made at great expense rather than simply borrowing a tiara for free. That’s the rub, though – Charles and Camilla didn’t want Kate to wear a tiara, because Cam was the one who had to shine (spoiler: she did not). The BAFTAs were another example of Kate not understanding that she should have worn something more special to a big event – she wore those cheap, tacky earrings and she made it seem like she thought the BAFTAs were a cheap costume party. She looked unserious and juvenile at the British film industry’s biggest event of the year.

In general, I think it’s fine that Kate wears inexpensive pieces for daily wear, for day events to Windsor baby banks or what have you. Like, no one is arguing that she should be dripping in diamonds to visit a food bank. But no one wants to acknowledge Kate’s tackiness and her inability to understand when, where and how to wear important pieces.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Cover Images.

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

145 Responses to “Princess Kate wears cheap jewelry because of the ‘cost of living crisis,’ okay??”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Greeneyedgirl says:

    I don’t think she wears any costume jewelry…just because it looks gaudy doesn’t mean it’s fake. I believe all the pieces are real gold…not plated or vermeil, and real diamonds and gemstones. I do think Camilla keeps a close reign on the jewelry and only gives her access to select pieces for events though. But doesn’t Katie have jewelry from Willy and pieces that were Diana’s? Personally I don’t see the point of costume jewelry. I would rather have one or two real pieces as opposed to ten fake ones. Plus I have a nickel allergy which is common in costume.

    • BW says:

      I’ve looked up some of the pieces on the various brands’ websites. They’re plated brass.

    • Weatherby says:

      I’m old enough to remember Kate’s Kiki McDonough phase, where everything looked cheap and small but always cost eye wateringly high. In some instances, tens of thousands high.

      A woman who prefers inexpensive jewelry? Pur-lease.

    • Jojo says:

      …But, sadly, the days of wearing important antique jewels on a daily basis appear to be over.”…

      Awwww. It’s just toooo sad.

      Meanwhile for millions of UK kids the days of having an adequate amount of food to eat, a clean school uniform, decent secure housing or the heating on during winter – on a daily basis – sadly also appear to be over.

      Really haven’t got any patience for these royal grifters. They understand as much about the cost of living crisis as I do about quantum mechanics.

      • Brenda says:

        “Those days are over”

        GREAT! Those gems can all be returned then to the original countries that they were stolen from in the first place.

    • Lorelei says:

      What? She’s worn jewelry from Zara and Monsoon, ffs. Definitely not real gold and diamonds!

    • Missskitttin says:

      She has a stylist. She just doesn’t have permission to use the good jewelry

    • Robin says:

      Agree 100!

      • Robin says:

        100% agree with your comments in the article… the same thing I was thinking. Kate has lots of opportunities but it is call LAZY Kate. The headbands looked awful and silly.

        …”The “lack of occasion” argument bugs me, because there have been plenty of occasions where it would have been entirely reasonable for Kate to borrow a tiara or a big necklace or major earrings and she just hasn’t or she was blocked from doing so. The coronation is the most obvious example – you can argue “the cost of living crisis” until you’re blue in the face, but Kate still chose to get those fruity custom headpieces made at great expense rather than simply borrowing a tiara for free.” Spot on!

  2. Talie says:

    Meghan was right in that regard – the powers that be will jump to defend Kate on some of the dumbest accusations – hair extensions, botox, jewelry, and say nothing on the stuff that could do real damage.

    • Jay says:

      That’s exactly what I thinking – it’s all “never explain” until somebody slights the princess’s hair extensions or her non-aristo taste in jewelry, then it’s all hands on deck!

      • BothSidesNow says:

        I imagine that CarolE was calling her vast connections from the gutter rats to straighten these stories out properly. CarolE must have been clutching her pearls all night!!! What a disaster, but alas it has been avoided, again.

  3. Uh oh Can’t and Carole got their feelings hurt so now she wears craptastic junk because of the economy. I believe she has been banned from the jewelry because Horsilla wants it that way. Also believe Can’t has horrible taste and wears huge and ugly pieces that don’t go with the outfit or event.

    • Mary Pester says:

      @susanCollins, to true Susan, Kate isn’t affected by the cost of living crisis, because she has no idea what it is 😂what Katy wants is full access to the Royal jewelry chest, and, knowing the way both she and her mother manipulate the press, she was hoping to get her sticky mits on ALL of it, once that necklace went missing there was no chance of that happening! So now princess tacky has to cover her backside with this crap. Stick to cheap and tacky Kate, it matches your personality

      • @Mary. Absolutely 100% right. Tacky is for sure her personality.

      • BRC says:

        Which necklace went missing?

      • TigerMcQueen says:

        I love the whole “cost of living crisis” excuse they have for everything. All the while ignoring the massive amounts of money spent on Khate’s wardrobe every year.

        “Look at her wearing cheap earrings (cost of living!!!) with her eleventy-billionth blue button covered bespoke dress that cost four figures that she’ll only wear once!!!”

      • BeanieBean says:

        @BRC: it’s the Cartier necklace, the Nizam of Hyderabad.

      • Minnieder says:

        What a stupid spin. If she cared about the COL crisis she wouldn’t show up to every event or whatever wearing brand new clothes that cost thousands of pounds.

      • Mrs.Krabapple says:

        THIS should be in headlines more. How the royals are taking $80 million of state jewelry and hiding/keeping the pieces personally. It’s theft. These people are grifters like Donald Trump.

        The tabloids will report that Meghan wore inappropriate earrings that one time (earrings that were received by ELIZABETH, not Meghan), but they don’t want to talk about the other royals stealing State property worth tens of millions

      • Iolanthe says:

        You don’t have to wear massive rocks and antique jewellery . I like the way Meghan uses crystals and semi precious stones set very simply..since I do much the same. Basically natural material like wood , ceramic , blown glass, freshwater pearls, silver rather than gold . Not these vast clanging synthetic or imitation things like brass masquerading as gold . Definitely cheap and tacky goes with Kate’s personality .

  4. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    It’s very telling (i.e., “racist”) that they leave out the part about “Meghan’s” earrings being given to ELIZABETH, ostensibly on behalf of Meghan. ELIZABETH is the one who accepted these earrings during a private lunch with the Saudi prince. Meghan’s only involvement was when ELIZABETH’s people told her, “here, you can wear these.”

    Anyway, Kate is tacky as hell, and that’s naturally reflected in her jewelry. And she needs to stop messing with her face. She is an example of an insecure woman like the step mother in Snow White, unable to accept that others are truly more attractive than she is. It must really burn her. Well, that, plus her husband cheats on her and screams and throws things at her. She is not loved and takes it out on other women.

    • BeanieBean says:

      I noticed that, too. Despicable.

    • Nic919 says:

      It’s interesting how Meghan never had access to the royal collection with articles bragging about being banned from it by AK 47 and William, but yet Meghan doesn’t wear jewellery that looks like cheap tacky shit like Kate has for years.

      The answer is that kate has zero taste and style and access to the royal collection or lack thereof is not the reason.

  5. Jais says:

    It’s just funny which stories Kate gets her people to respond to. Anything about her appearance really sets her off. Hilariously phrased that “it’s believed” that William gifted her some pieces. It’s interesting too how no one is explicitly saying who gets to decide about wearing jewelry. Presumably it’s Charles and Camilla and they’re saying no. Finally, Kate wears expensive new outfits pretty regularly so it’s pretty patronizing to say her jewelry choices are due to the cost of living crisis.

    • Giddy says:

      It is patronizing, and we know a lie when we see one. The woman who chose to wear outrageous diamond jewelry to Prince Phillip’s funeral does not now willingly opt for costume unless forced. Camzilla is having so much fun blocking Kate’s access to the vaults. (I picture Cam like Scrooge McDuck in his money vault, swimming through gold and diamonds, diving into sapphires and rubies.)

    • Feeshalori says:

      I picture Camilla as the old crone of the manor jingling the keys on her chatelaine calling the shots and drunk on power (both physically and figuratively).

      • roooth says:

        Yep. And never satisfied. She’s going to go down drunk, bitching and moaning the whole way about how unfair it all is, while swathed in Liz’s diamonds and cursing Chuck

  6. Amy Bee says:

    I was wondering what angle they were going to use to include Meghan in the piece. Whatever the fact is Kate doesn’t know when to wear her jewellery.

  7. The Old Chick says:

    Make it make sense! Keen wears thousands of pounds of ugly ass crap clothing every time she walks out the door. Plus cheap or cheap looking accessories. She’s an absolute disgrace. She’s disgusting

  8. DARK says:

    If she had a decent stylist she wouldn’t have to figure it out on her own. Whats the point of all that money if she can’t hire someone to fix this for her.

    • Bec says:

      Honestly, I think she absolutely has a stylist – but that doesn’t mean she knows what a *good* stylist is, or has the sense to listen to them. It’s like Donald Trump – all the money he needs, and he won’t let anyone fix his hair, apply his fake tan (so, so badly) on his face, or put him in a properly-tailored suit.

  9. Harper says:

    Can’t correct the Meghan made Kate cry story, but we’ve got whiplash due to how fast this jewelry rebuttal was issued. Horsemilla cutting Kate out from the royal vault is a real raw spot over at Adelaide and Bucklebury. They were hoping no one would notice, but Cams made sure we did.

    • SarahCS says:

      While simultaneously bringing back the Meghan / earrings false narrative. They’re all racist and will tell us so at every opportunity.

  10. Cassie says:

    There she is in all her glory , the Princess of tackiness .
    As someone referred to her as William’s stick wife , a perfect name for her ,

  11. Miranda says:

    She could wear shit from f–king Claire’s for all anyone cares, and this narrative of her being the Lenin of accessorizing, trying to appear relatable to those who are truly struggling would still ring hollow. At the same time, she insists on spending thousands upon thousands upon thousands on a dozen different colors of the same drab, dated coat dresses, sister-wife getups, and cosplaying her in-laws.

  12. Wow whatever happened to “never complain never explain.” For her to respond to something so unimportant is just ridiculous.

  13. Normades says:

    Girl does not know how to accessorize at all. In every photo above the jewelry totally clashes with the style of the outfit. It’s jarring actually.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      No. Keen couldn’t accessorize herself if she had access to ALL of the Royal jewels and then some!

      Keen just needs to accept that she has bad taste, bad style and a horrendous personality. Whatever she wears she ruins it before she walks out the door.

      Maybe she should be studying Meghans mood boards that she has been meticulously creating all these years, right????

  14. OriginalLala says:

    None of what she wears is cheap in the monetary sense, but it looks cheap and tacky because Kate is cheap and tacky.
    I’m not a royal but I have a small but solid collection of classic fine gold jewelry that I can always rely on to look elegant. It’s not that hard Kate, even little middle class people like me can figure it out

    • Carrot says:

      I really think you nailed it. Add to that Kate isn’t a nice person and that makes her look less appealing too.

      A few pieces of good gold jewelry can go so, SO far in fashion and social engagements. In fund-raising I would call this kind of editing a must in the toolbox and I’m always in admiration of people who get the tone right

  15. Seraphina says:

    Kate will never fit in to this circle, EVER. Her only hope is when George sits on the throne.
    What is interesting is that there is a full blown attack on Kate/Middletons and Wills has been going out trying to look like a dapper prince with his solo gigs – looking happier when he is with Sophie than his own wife. Ma Middleton and Kate need to watch their steps. They are no match for the force of Wills and Cams. And if this does bond Wills and Cams, I am sure King Chuck will give his blessing.

  16. The Old Chick says:

    Sorry guys, as a genuine old person retiree, who struggles with actual food costs, she disgusts the hell out of me. I loathe them so much and yes, I’m freaking angry. Signed Angry old freaking commonwealth person

    • Cassie says:

      Old chick I am an old Aussie chick and I feel exactly like you .
      They all disgust me for the dreadful treatment of Harry and Meghan .
      I hate everything about them and everything they stand for .

    • Jaded says:

      I’m an old Canadian retiree chick and do not live in the lap of Boomer luxury. I buy consignment clothes, haven’t eaten out in years and rarely travel. Seeing the outrageously ostentatious life that useless bish lives all the while doing f*ck-all makes me see red. She and her godawful family can all rot.

  17. girl_ninja says:

    Kate is simple, sad and stunted. She has a stylist, fashion magazines and a myriad of other means to see what works in a look and she’s even too lazy to do that. Now using the British people who are struggling day to day survive as an excuse.

    What a flop she is. A trash flop.

    • roooth says:

      You hit the mark. Laziness is the root of all Kkkate’s issues. She has ZERO intellectual curiosity. She stopped learning decades ago. She sees no need to make any effort other than being performative for a few minutes at a time every once in awhile. Actual learning would be work, and she does not work. She has never worked. She doesn’t have to, and she has no natural inclination to do anything resembling actual work.

  18. Hyacinth Bucket says:

    If I have to look at that ugly, crumpled foil, tiara cosplay headband one more time, I’ll gauge my eyes out. I bet Camilla gigglesnorts every single time she thinks of it. “Look what I made her wear…

    • Ina says:

      And I can’t unsee the uglier clownish ensemble she wore at BAFTA with the gaudy big earrings and hideous gloves.

      • Hyacinth Bucket says:

        Oh yes, black gloves and in a different fabric, too. The earrings would make for a passable Christmastree decoration, though.

      • Carrot says:

        I really liked the Bafta (Zara?) earrings … for ME! They didn’t belong on that person, at that function, with that horrible outfit

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Carrot, that’s what I thought, too. I have no idea why she thought those earrings worked with that dress. I have a long neck so I could wear them but it would not be with formal wear. I would never wear those gloves.

        Are we wrong? Could she be doing this on purpose rather than not knowing what she’s doing? I was raised lower middle class and I’ve NEVER done some of the things she’s done with jewelry and clothing.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        That outfit was SOOO bad. And you don’t wear opera gloves pulled up into your armpits! They are supposed to end halfway up the bicep – and if she wanted to go for a black and white look, then it is black dress and white gloves, that works better in terms of visual harmony. Kate has no “eye” whatsoever.

      • roooth says:

        You mean the cattle insemination gloves? Maybe she came straight from the stables

    • Harper says:

      Don’t forget the garish parachute material robes Cams added to obliterate Kate’s bespoke McQueen coronation gown. Genius maneuver. The evil cackling coming out of Ray Mill has to be ear-splitting for the neighbors.

      • Hyacinth Bucket says:

        That’s exceeding giggles, that’s a full blown guffaw.

      • Nic919 says:

        Sophie had the same robes as Kate but since she didn’t have the cheap party pieces tiara she didn’t look as bad.

    • SarahLee says:

      I actually love that headband. Its purpose was an F-you to Chuck and Cam for not letting her wear a tiara, so she had a headpiece created that was honestly the most recognizable part of what anyone wore. Plus, little Charlotte matching. I’ll give the devil her due on this one. That strategy played out precisely as she intended.

      • Chaine says:

        True that. If you asked me to recall the coronation, she and Charlotte in the matching headbands are about all I remember. And wasn’t Louis dressed like a little junior mortician or something.

      • LaurieLee says:

        LMAO at “Junior mortician” hahaha

  19. Eurydice says:

    This is so interesting. It gives us a window into what is really important to the RF, what is their true mission statement. They don’t push back at insinuations of laziness or how many houses or rude behavior or outright lack of empathy, but God forbid you don’t look Royal. No better way to show that it’s all about optics.

  20. Becks1 says:

    Kate doesn’t know how to accessorize or what is appropriate when, period. She really thought those ugly gold earrings were doing something at the BAFTAs.

    The thing is, this goes both ways. We DO see her wearing diamonds to daytime events where something more classic or understated would be more appropriate. She shows up in brand new designer clothes at every engagement but we’re supposed to believe it’s the jewelry that signals she understands the COL crisis? And we HAVE seen her wear $$$$ jewelry to some events. It’s just that she’s not wearing anything she didn’t wear before the Queen passes.

    All this tells me is that Charles and Camilla have blocked her access to the royal vault and she is TICKED about it.

    • Lorelei says:

      And she buys multiple bespoke outfits — costing thousands of pounds each — that all look EXACTLY THE SAME. That does not scream someone who’s worried about the cost of anything.

  21. Mamasan says:

    I get a different vibe from the article. This is a subtle Chuck and Wattle hit piece nuancing the more economical pieces of jewelry Kate wears since the embarrassing disclosure of the mislaid 80 million pound jewels who were last seen in Kate’s possession.
    The Royal jewels are now off limits with I’m sure some special circumstances. She’s left to figure the rest out by herself.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Mamasan, there were 11 pieces of jewelry missing for that amount. Did Khate wear each of them last? Is she holding them hostage?

  22. Dot Gingell says:

    Oooh, Peggsy won’t be happy – this makes him look cheap…

    “pieces from the high street and pieces from modern jewellers like Kiki McDonough as well… Which I believe often have been given to her by Prince William to mark special occasions.”

    • TheWigletOfWails says:

      He doesn’t care. A while ago, a series of tweets basically mocking them (but mostly her) for not having access to the Crown Jewels or and good (expensive) pieces went viral.

    • Lizzie says:

      Does William routinely give Kate jewelry?

      • Jay says:

        We used to hear stories about how William had “gifted” this or that piece of jewelry to Kate, although not recently. The last one I think we heard about was supposedly a present for giving birth to Louis?

        I always assumed she just picked out the pieces herself and then claimed they were gifted to her. W has never struck me as the type to be super demonstrative in that way, especially when it comes to money.

        Plus, until recently, pretty much everything came out of Charles’ grant, so it’s probably more accurate to say that Kate gifted herself jewels that were paid for by Charles on behalf of his son.

      • notasugarhere says:

        No, he doesn’t. Kate picks out the things and buys them with Duchy money. Small things with eye-watering prices like the Kiki McD someone referenced above. Her ugly gemstone charm necklace was around 20,000 pounds. And her Olympic theme jewelry, including an 80,000 pound necklace and custom, massive aquamarine hoop earrings.

        That has been the deal for years, she shops her heart out, the Duchy pays, and she pretends they were William gifts. Even the diamond eternity band, that stans insisted was a push present from William? The shopkeeper admitted William wasn’t involved.

  23. Scooby Gang says:

    “The Princess of Wales often wears pieces which were worn and loved by Princess Diana, but it would be inappropriate for the Queen to do so.”

    Yikes! They went there. 😂

    • tamsin says:

      I imagine that quite a lot of jewelry that Diana wore were a part of the royal collection or loaned to her by the late Queen Elizabeth II so they would not be bequeathed to her sons. However, it would be great to see more of Diana’s jewelry on Kate or Meghan. On the other hand, maybe they won’t show up until Charlotte or Lili are old enough to wear jewelry.

  24. Feeshalori says:

    Does anyone know what are the missing jewels that were supposedly last seen on Kate?

    • Shoshone says:

      Yes, please tell about the missing jewels.

      • Becks1 says:

        Oh I can’t spell it lol
        And im on my phone so it’s a pain to look up. Hyberzaad? Hyberdezaad? The really big Diamond necklace she has worn on a few occasions. She wore it when pregnant with Charlotte in NYC. I think. Probably the biggest piece we have seen her wear.

        Anyway it seems to be missing.

        Okay managed to look it up. Nizam of Hyderabad. Worth 66 million pounds.

    • Nanea says:

      It’s the Nizam of Hyderabad diamond necklace and it’s worth several million £££. It was made by Cartier in 1935, with more than 300 platinum-set diamonds. It has a detachable double-drop pendant.

      The Guardian had a story on it, complete with Kate wearing the Nizam necklace, that’s been shared here before, about how jewelry worth ~ £ 80 million is missing from the Royal Collection, apparently because it’s personal property or whatever.

      https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/apr/14/official-jewellery-gifts-to-royals-worth-80m-are-not-in-national-collection

      • BothSidesNow says:

        Funny enough but I posted the same article above! And it’s not one necklace that is missing. There are several pieces from the Royal collection that are missing as well!!

        There was also an article that many of Diana’s jewels, of her own, that have not been seen since she passed in ‘97 as well!!
        https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/the-multimilliondollar-mystery-of-princess-dianas-missing-jewels/news-story/708ed176862fc17f9287a938794b5b37

        Though I question the source.

      • Lorelei says:

        They LOST that necklace?? How on earth…?

      • Diana says:

        I didn’t read that article as saying it was missing, but that it wasn’t in the Royal Collection. Assuming that the collection works like museum collections, that typically means there’s a formal accession process, it gets a number assigned, and then you’re not allowed (generally, according to museum ethics) to sell it. The argument the palace seems to be making is that because these pieces were gifted prior to 1995 then they aren’t part of the “Collection,” which makes sense. It’s not quite the spirit of the law, but it is the letter of (this) “law.” Probably gives them more flexibility for wearing, storing, sharing, etc., but doesn’t mean that they’re “lost.” I’m basing this just on that article though!

    • Feeshalori says:

      Ok, thank you all, l know of that necklace. Kate wore it years ago where her hanging hair all but obliterated that chonker. I remember her also wearing it at that formal state dinner for China if I recall. That is a major piece of jewelry gone missing. Maybe fell down between one of Kate’s sofa cushions?😉

      • Feeshalori says:

        ETA: but according to the article, there seems to be other pieces missing as well.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      Ma is trying to flog it to pay off her debtors!!!

      • BothSidesNow says:

        That was my FIRST thought @ Digital Unicorn!!!!

        It wouldn’t surprise me one but if Keen handed her Mum some of the royal jewels to get her out of the jam she has caused!! Though it wouldn’t go to pay off those that she nearly bankrupted. It would have been used for their daily needs!! CarolE is much too selfish to think of those she left financially devastated. Puh-lease…………

  25. Carrot says:

    My understanding of Charles saying no tiaras, crowns, etc was to prevent all other royals from getting decked out in their glorious finery. He wanted to have the sparkliest sparkly on his especially special self-referential cos play day

    Kate wore a tiara to the coronation. A tiara can be made of anything. Precious gems aren’t requisite. They can call it millinery (and they did, because she needed to have something on her head for archaic reasons and shame on her for not wearing the dorky floppy hat with the dorky feather) but it was a tiara all the same

    Why doesn’t Kate have better people styling her? After reading Spare I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s that she can’t afford to pay them

  26. aquarius64 says:

    All this fuss about the jewelry is really about Kate’s insecurities. Not getting access to the Royal Collection serves as a reminder to Kate where she comes from: commoner stock. The Middletons are three generations from the coal mine a and the aristos will never them forget it. She needs the jewels to make her feel and seen as important. Hence the cheap jewels because cost of living spin. I bet it peeves Kate that Meghan has Diana’s Cartier watch – and another Cartier watch Meghan bought for herself – proving Meghan has the means to buy expensive jewelry and Kate never did. Meghan also has her own Big Blue, Diana’s aquamarine cocktail ring, a wedding gift from Harry. Meghan’s engagement ring was designed by Harry with the help of the royal jeweler, a ring Archie could give to his future bride. William just handed Kate the cursed Big Blue. I imagined Harry has half of Diana’s jewels in the US to be left for Archie and Lili.

    • zebz says:

      Kate actually recently copied a piece from Diana’s collection that Meghan has. The gold bracelett with blue stones. She wore her version to wimbledon wearing the green roland mouret dress. She and Will are definitely jealous and pissed that Meghan has access to any jewelry Diana has worn. Especially pieces that Meghan wears regularly/every day like the watch and diamond bracelett. I would also bet money that Harry has the iconic sapphire choker of Diana’s too. Kate definitely would’ve worn that by now if she had access to it.

      Harry not only custom designed Meghan’s engagment ring, but her eternity ring for their first wedding anniversary. Has William ever custom made anything for Kate? I think not.

      Kate’s whole flow of jewelry and apperance changed after seeing what Meghan wore. Gone was the white gold and gemstone pieces, enter yellow gold and minimal piecies. She went from wearing one piece of jewelry once with george’s name after he was born, to consistantly wearing inital necklaces with their names. Which btw Meghan was slammed for wearing when it was first discovered she was Harry’s gf. Also notice she never wears anything with William’s inital or reference to him on it, like Meghan does Harry.

      Everything Kate has done has been a response to Meghan ever since she found out she was dating Harry. it’s pathetic.

      • Tessa says:

        I just love that harry crested and designed those rings for meghan

      • Tessa says:

        Created the rings

      • kelleybelle says:

        I wish there was a like button on here. I agree with every word of this.

      • tamsin says:

        That pearl and sapphire choker that Diana wore was stunning, but I’m wondering if it was part of the royal collection. I’ve seen stunning pearl and gemstone chokers on Camilla, and I’m trying to remember if Camilla has worn a pearl choker with saphires. I’m wondering if that piece has been dismantled and redesigned. Kate wore the emerald headband in the Boston appearance. Kate seems to have a monopoly on the diamond and saphires that Diana owned. Kate has worn some beautiful fine jewelry with her evening wear. I remember a gorgeous ruby necklace which was apparently a wedding gift, and one of the late Queen’s spectacular diamond and emerald necklaces.

        I’m wondering why Harry doesn’t own the pearl earrings his mother wore to his christening. I like the way Meghan quietly honours Diana by wearing her watch and diamond tennis bracelets as a regular part of her wardrobe. It was moving to see the Queen’s gift as the only jewelry on Meghan at the funeral. I notice that Meghan wears bracelets a lot and Kate didn’t but she wore a bracelet to a daytime event recently. I think it was a tribute to Diana’s gold bangle with blue stones. It would be lovely to see Meghan wearing pearls of some kind. I think pearls are the June birthstone- Lili’s month.

      • Feeshalori says:

        The absence of Diana’s magnificent sapphire and pearl choker is a real mystery because I’m sure Kate would have been wearing the life out of it if she had it. Camilla has plenty of pearl chokers, but none with sapphires and nothing of the quality of that gem. That sapphire is just stunning. It was originally a brooch that the queen mother gave to Diana as a wedding gift which she wore a few times before having it re-designed into the choker. I think other than big blue, that’s one of the most iconic of Diana’s pieces. It’s such a shame that we don’t see it anymore. But I doubt Kate would be unable to do that choker justice wearing it.

      • Feeshalori says:

        Sorry, able not unable.

      • zebz says:

        @tamsin It wasn’t a tribute to Diana’s bracelet. Meghan owns that bracelet and has worn it several times. It’s more sinister an intention.

        The earrings Diana wore to Harry’s christening, were part of the royal collection, NOT Diana’s collection. Hence she didn’t own them personally to pass on to Harry. The choker however was Diana’s personal property and hasn’t been seen since Diana last wore it.

        Meghan has worn pearls before. Most recently on the cut photoshoot and the queens funeral. I don’t think they are really her thing. Along with not liking colored stones as much.

  27. Digital Unicorn says:

    Mumbles wears this ‘cheap’ jewellery as its very likely freebies in exchange for KP PR to release the name of the brand she’s wearing. And yeah, she can’t wear jewels just like she can’t wear high end designer.

    Mumbles is a middle class girl through and through – she should just embrace it.

    • kelleybelle says:

      Many of the things she wears don’t look great just given how damned thin she is.

      • Nic919 says:

        Also fancy jewelry doesn’t cover the fact that she is rapidly aging and the botox and fillers aren’t working anymore.

  28. TheWigletOfWails says:

    I see Missoma is being mentioned here as one of Kate’s go to brands. Once again our single white female has Columbused a designer Meghan loved. What a weirdo.

  29. QuiteContrary says:

    Kate could actually be helpful if she wore modern jewelry made by independent British artists but she lacks the creativity and the will.

    She’s just a style disaster.

  30. Interested Gawker says:

    LMFAO

  31. Sass says:

    This is a really weird nonstory for the palace to run with. Like so stupidly weird. Something else is up.

  32. kelleybelle says:

    “Catherine has a very sensitive and modern approach to jewellery,” says Bethan Holt … lol.
    Kate hasn’t got a red CLUE how to wear jewelry, she doesn’t know the difference between day and evening jewelry and every brooch she wears is either ill-placed, gaudy as hell, unnecessary or clashes with the print of her clothing. What a load of bollocks. Meghan is the only with the jewelry-wearing talent and I think they know it. That being said, I CRINGE big when I see these black gloves with a white gown and her looking so proud of herself. Ugh, not a good look.

    • Tessa says:

      Those gloves were worn when she tried to hold wills hand and he moved away

    • Lizzie says:

      I mean, the Bafta outfit could be in a cringe hall of fame. The black gloves and awful earrings never stop making me cringe. Is this her all time worst evening look?

      • Jaded says:

        The Bond premiere dress runs a close second. Talk about Las Vegas glitter…and the earrings she wore with it were awful, as was her enormous wiglet bun. She’s so thin the dress looked like it was still on a hanger.

  33. Tamra says:

    The missing necklace was beautiful on the queen and looked like it belonged on her. KKKHate ,managed to make it look gaudy! LOL

  34. Blithe says:

    Ok, this is sad, but the main thing that jumped out at me from this is: Kate has a STYLIST?!!! Who’s willing to be identified publicly? By name? I’m too through. lol

    Yeah, I agree that Kate would be better served by wearing —and rewearing— a few simple pieces, especially if the alternative is wearing garish costume jewelry that, IMO, often doesn’t suit her or the outfits. I actually like the diamond earrings and necklace that she wears a lot for daytime events. I think Queen Elizabeth had the right idea — with the pearl and diamond earrings (from Queen Mary?) that she wore almost as a trademark, with her brooches, and going all out for tiara events. Since the Queen gave Meghan smaller versions of those earrings, and I’m pretty sure I’ve seen Anne and maybe Sophie wear similar earrings, I’m guessing that Kate may have some too — as a gift from the Queen. If so, she should wear them. They’re versatile, and suggest her connection with royalty, and might suit her better than the chandeliers that she often picks.

  35. Teagirl says:

    I can’t get over “the Princess of Wales shows us time and time again how to wear all three seamlessly and effortlessly.”
    What the heck are they smoking

  36. Blujfly says:

    Kate wore a mouwad Demi parure of rubies and diamonds that was a wedding gift and the royals refused to say who gifted it. Kate’s art deco emerald and diamond earrings and parure is merely “believed to be” bought for her by Charles, but could be from anyone. Are we suppose to believe the Saudis simply ignored Kate’s wedding?

    • Deanne from Canada says:

      @Blufly

      Yes!! I wondered about both of those bits you mentioned B/c Charles would be completely fine w/ taking rightful credit for gifting his daughters-in-law jewelry. (ie: Meghan’s Cartier wedding bracelet if memory serves was from Charles)

      The one off of the Ruby flower necklace w/ that stunning McQueen black velvet strapless gown was a moment. Kate has worn the corresponding flower drop earrings another time I believe.

      So my logic is that RF wanted to downplay Saudi contacts /gifts (like those Sophie received but had to return) by directing Kate to not wear said pieces publicly.

      Also remember that Cartier $40k long necklace with 3 circles that Kate sported for London 2012 games? That wedding gift disappeared as well!

      In 10 years of collecting early years w/ her 20 pairs of Kiki M (overpriced) earrings, 4 low key gold rings, C charm bracelet from Camilla, acorn gold pendant …she really doesn’t naturally wear good jewelry every day. No gold hoops, no Pearl studs, … She’s become too calculating in her need to buy something NEW ALL THE DAMN TIME! (Although it is cheaper both in price and in appearance!)

      She may have a shopping addiction. (I’m dead serious)

      • Lily says:

        Kate also has an eating disorder. When you turn sideways you should not nearly disappear.

      • Nic919 says:

        Kate definitely has a shopping addiction. When you buy multiples of the same thing over and over again, it’s not normal. It’s clear she’s trying to compensate for her empty marriage.

        And one of the old royal forums had tracked all the Kiki jewelry kate purchased and it was ridiculous. It’s like she bought the whole store.

  37. Deering24 says:

    A question: if Kate knew how to properly accessorize jewelry (costume and real), would there be so much kerfuffle over whether she’s “fit” to wear royal pieces? I’ve seen women wearing costume jewelry so well you wouldn’t care if it was fake. But Kate and Camilla make everything look cheesy or overmuch. Thanks!

  38. Well Wisher says:

    “The provenance of jewellery can be a thorny issue for royals – as we saw when the Duchess of Sussex wore a pair of diamond earrings during the Royal Tour of New Zealand, Fiji and Tonga in 2018. Palace aides initially claimed that the earrings were “borrowed”, but it later emerged that they were a gift from Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, who is accused of ordering the assassination of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi.”

    The question is why did the palace/courtiers accept the gift on behalf of Meghan?
    Who suggested that she wear them on the tour to not offend the benefactor?
    Why only when the guardian did a piece questioning the ties of the RF on the behest of their government(s) involvement due to arms sales??
    ( This was before the companies involved were sold off.)

    This in proper context make the overused screed against Meghan void.

  39. Leslie says:

    A couple of things struck me about the Telegraph article. First, Kate has a stylist? Never heard of Natasha Archer but she must have either terrible taste herself, or else she despises Kate, because Kate’s fashion choices are, to say the least, unfortunate. She has no idea how to choose attractive outfits, including accessories. A lot of her jewellery is actually hideous and doesn’t go with either her outfit or the occasion on which she is wearing it. Secondly, a cost of living crisis in no way affects the monarchy. Chuck is a billionaire and his wife demonstrates absolutely no restraint in HER jewellery choices whatsoever. What a ridiculous piece of sychophantic garbage. Lastly, doesn’t anyone (in the press) care anymore about eighty million pounds worth of missing jewellery?

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/apr/14/official-jewellery-gifts-to-royals-worth-80m-are-not-in-national-collection

    • Becks1 says:

      Natasha Archer is married to the photographer Chris Jackson, which explains his obsession with photoshopping Kate.

    • zebz says:

      Natasha Archer is not a real stylist and has no qualifications. She has no fine arts degree. Nor does she have other clients. She was Kate’s Personal assistant since 2007. Kate called her as a “stylist” because she liked the way she dressed herself. Not because she had a great track record or portfolio. She is a paid sychophant IMO. side note: she is also married to chris jackson, the royal family photoshopper.

    • Nic919 says:

      Natasha actually dresses better than kate does. It’s likely that kate doesn’t listen to anyone and that Carole is the stylist.

  40. Jen says:

    If she really wanted to be frugal, she’d wear the stuff she already owns/has access to instead of constantly buying new pieces. And so many are very similar. Just the pearl (real and faux) earrings alone, there are probably a dozen.

  41. tamsin says:

    I just shake my head every time I see the BAFTA get-up- those gloves up to the arm-pits, the draped one-shouldered dress, and the sparkly shoes. Too much and not the right stuff. I think the dress is inoffensive enough, but it just looks dull. A stunning royal piece around the neck would have been great. There is too much all around, and nothing that stands out that’s beautiful. I think the straight hair was very nice, though.

    The green dress worn to the EarthShot event is also inoffensive enough. I think she wore padding to give her shape from the back. I think the straight hair would have also looked nice for the occasion. Kate wore the emerald necklace very nicely. It would have stood out more on a black or white gown.

    The tiara fascinator worn at the Coronation certainly made Kate memorable. It was bigger than any tiara that Camilla or the late Queen wore. But just even the concept seems so tacky to me. Sometimes with Kate, you just don’t know where to look because it’s just too much. The gold dress at the movie premiere was styled by what looked like a rat’s nest on her head because the complicated hair piece was seemingly becoming undone. I though Camilla looked better than Kate that night, and lovely in her pastel sparkly gown.

    I think Kate had some lovely moments at premieres during her earlier years as a royal. She wore lovely gowns and looked beautiful and happy to be present.

    • Nic919 says:

      Kate should never wear stick straight hair. It ages her incredibly. The bafta photos show this despite some of the photoshopped ones.

  42. zinjazin says:

    Re: “Lack of occasion”
    I mean i briefly follow the swedish royal family (somewhat by default) and they are four ladies and they have a substantial amount of pretty impressive tiaras and jewellry actually, and they all wear them like all the time, it seems to me at least, like several times a year. And some of them are assigned towards for example the queen but they rotate them a lot between them.
    And they all have their own privately owned tiaras aswell.
    When Sophia married into the family she was gifted a versatile diamond tiara by the king and queen so that she will have her own.

    • Feeshalori says:

      Yes, that is a lovely tiara and the different toppers do make it so versatile.

    • Snoodle says:

      It does help that they have that Nobel gala every year. Anyone trying to argue that THAT should be less formal or less blingy would get mobbed from all sides, every industry. In these tiara-less times it is nice to have some things remain constant.

  43. May says:

    About the missing Royal Collction jewelry, while I don’t doubt the Kate is capable of pawning off, giving away or breaking up a piece of the Queen’s jewelry, that necklace to my knowledge was never in the Royal collection. There seems to be some confusion, especially among the journalists that wrote that piece, about what is and isn’t in the Royal Collection or has been deemed property of the crown (like Queen Victoria’s coronation necklace) by a sovereign as opposed to the Queen’s private collection of jewelry.

    It is only relatively recently, since 2005 approximately (?), that some significant pieces of jewelry gifted to royal family members automatically become the property of the Royal Collection (like pieces of jewelry gifted on Royal tours or at other public functions). That law to my knowledge was not retroactive, so all of the jewelry that the Queen previously received was in her private collection. So, there is an awful lot of jewelry that the Queen owned that was not in the Royal Collection. Indeed, I think the majority of it.

    Now, is the necklace truly missing? As in, they don’t know where it is? Well, that would be a huge issue but I don’t think it is the case. However, it is interesting that the Royal family has not responded, directly or through their tabloid links, to this issue. They or the Middletons certainly seem to respond to a lot of other issues, the article which is the subject of this thread is one such example.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      May, it appears the ‘policy’ was updated in 2003 and made no mention of jewelry given before that date. The question I have is what about any jewelry that Princess Di received as wedding gifts? If you follow that they were owned personally, was that jewelry part of her private collection? I think the answer to this would be quite informational.

      • May says:

        All of the jewelry that Diana received (as a wedding gift, on Royal tours, etc.) was in her own personal, private collection. With a couple caveats. First, it was reported that she received some pieces of jewelry as gifts but they appear to be “gifts” in the vein of Frogmore Cottage. For example, the emerald and diamond choker that was long said to have been a wedding gift from the Queen was more recently said to have been a part of the Queen’s collection and was returned after Diana’s death. So, some of the gifts had been loans.

        Also, the Queen nixed a few gifts to Diana. Not because they were inappropriate under any policy but because the Queen herself deemed them inappropriate. For example, the pear-shaped Pearl and diamond earrings that Kate now wears were a replacement for a gift from a jeweler (diamond chandelier earrings and necklace) that the Queen deemed too grand from a firm (never mind that Princess Anne had received a gorgeous tiara from a firm). Did the Queen somehow think that the jeweler could then exert some influence over Diana? Or, did the Queen not want Diana to have nice things of her own. Personally, I think it was the latter (the Queen loaned Diana a paltry few nice pieces of jewelry during Diana’s marriage).

        Also, some of the jewelry that Diana wore was borrowed from jewelry firms and it is not clear exactly which of her pieces had been borrowed (except the large cross pendant that was recently auctioned, we know that was) but there were a few items that she wore only once and which may have been borrowed.

        So, while Diana was able to keep as her personal property everything that the Queen allowed her have, her jewelry collection is not large compared to other Royals (certainly not other Princesses of Wales).

        There is a website called Diana’s Jewel’s, or something like that, which lists most of the jewelry that she wore. I think it mentions whether or not they were known to have been loaned to her. You might want to check it out!

  44. Lily says:

    The money for the old pieces of jewelry already is spent. I would wear them and point out that Kate isn’t spending $500-$1,000 of current money on cheaper jewelry.

  45. Lily says:

    There is a blog out there with an article about Kate’s seventeen green coats and coat dresses. She could be frugal and rewear them for the next two decades when she visits the Irish Guards.

  46. Kathryn says:

    A good bit commentary on British class is in season 3 of Succession when one of the characters mentions that someone had to buy all of their own furniture i.e. didn’t inherit it and was therefore not posh

    • Libra says:

      Same comment was made by Lady Mary on Downton Abbey.

    • May says:

      So, my relatives handing me their cast off furniture and kitchen wares when I moved into my first apartment (much of which I still have) makes me posh? Whoopee! 🙄

  47. Sharyn says:

    I think that Catherine is correct about the cost of living and this is shown by not parading the crown Jewells in front of ordinary folk who are worried about finance, She shows that she to can wear what they can afford. Well done YOUR Royal Highness.

  48. MinorityReport says:

    Kate’s minions definitely read this site, because the COL/frugal princess angle was predicted by a commenter on the original “Kate doesn’t wear royal jewelry well” article.

  49. Robin says:

    Kate doesn’t know how to wear jewelry. She makes it all look cheap…even the real stuff! Same with her hair…lifeless hair and with a flat hair dye. She isn’t working with what she has. Meghan Markle was the best thing that happened to Kate.!

  50. ales says:

    Clueless and styleless Khate. She can take any outfit and make it look bad. It is not about how much money you spend, it is all about styling. Kates idea of cheap jewelry looks bad, a bit of really cheap metal with a few plastic beads attached, is never going to look stylish. There is some great costume jewelry that is very difficult to tell that it is not precious metals, you need to be selective. Maybe Khate likes the attention that having no style, other than boring or bad, gets her…