Published On: Sun, Feb 19th, 2023

Camilla ‘should create own legacy’ at coronation and ‘fashion something original’ – claims

has chosen Queen Mary’s Crown for the upcoming , which was made for the latter to wear at King George V’s ceremony in 1911. A style expert spoke exclusively to to give his opinion on which crown Queen Camilla should have worn.

Eddie LeVian is the CEO of Le Vian, which is available at Ernest Jones in the UK. His ancestors in 18th century Persia guarded the royal jewels, including the Koh-I-Noor diamond, which was originally rumoured to be the crown Queen Camilla would wear at the coronation.

This crown was worn by the late Queen Mother at King George VI’s coronation in 1936, however, there is some controversy surrounding the jewel given many believe it to be stolen from India.

He said: “The Koh-I-Noor was one of the largest diamonds ever discovered. It was discovered in India. At the time in 1746, India was not being ruled by the Indians, it was being ruled by the Mughal emperors who had conquered India.

“The King of Persia ended up conquering India in 1736. He chose the LeVians to come to be the guardian of the jewels. The choice of the LeVians at the time was mainly because of their integrity and reputation.

READ MORE: Only one female royal is exempt from curtsying to others

“The story of how the King got the Koh-I-Noor is very interesting – it was gifted to Queen Victoria. So that’s how it came to the UK. So unlike popular contention, the UK did not conquer India or Persia to get the diamond, this diamond was gifted to the Queen.

“Obviously many people in India would love to get back the Koh-I-Noor. But I don’t think that after hundreds of years that the UK would be doing that because it wasn’t taken.”

Mr LeVian claimed that it would be a “sensitive issue”, had Queen Camilla chosen to wear the Koh-I-Noor diamond.

He added: “I think it’s a sensitive issue right now. Despite the fact that this was not taken by force, it would be a little insensitive to wear it because of the way it has become a symbol of England’s imperial past. And so it would create further controversy.


“In my opinion, Camilla should create her own legacy, and not rely on wearing the Queen Mother’s crown to make her mark as Queen.

“I think that would strike a balance because it would show sensitivity to the feelings of various people. But my point about the Koh-I-Noor is that the acquisition of the Koh-I-Noor was a gift from the Indian Trading Company, and was not tied to the British having any control over India.

“And as such, I believe that was fairly acquired. But at the same time, I think it would be unnecessary for Camilla to get herself and the country into controversy.”

Despite Queen Camilla’s announcement that she will be wearing Queen Mary’s Crown at King Charles’s coronation, Mr LeVian still believes that the Queen Consort should have worn a brand new crown.

READ MORE: Kate avoided ‘wardrobe malfunction’ at wedding ‘with help of Sophie’

He claimed: “I think royalty plays a very important role in the UK, and the Queen’s ability to strike a balance very much represents the people.

“I think, after 70 years of the historic reign of Queen Elizabeth, Queen Camilla will have to really be thoughtful in the way that she handles the royal court in the way that unites the people of England, and avoids controversial issues.

“In my opinion, Camilla represents our future. And so I’m talking out of the box and saying, instead of borrowing from the past she could have represented how the future of England is bright.

“And by fashioning something original and rare, she would have been much more reachable to the women of today.

“The UK has gone through many difficult times throughout its history and has always come to the top. During World War II, that determination of the British people probably saved the world, while the Americans were gun-shy to enter the war, the British stood by Europe and fought.

“I think the UK has also shown its desire for self-determination by accepting to bite the bullet and go through .

“As much as that was a controversial decision, I think that it symbolises the independence of the British people.

“So I feel that there’s a bright future and Camilla could have used this opportunity to symbolise that look to the future.”

Source link

Most Popular News