#British Aristocrat Wedding

[europesroyalsweddings]

✵ September 16, 1989 ✵

Victoria Lockwood & Charles Spencer, Viscount Althorp

#royal wedding #british aristocrat

[porryc]

Detailed description of how old Gabriel Agreste is acording to show with leaks

In Episode 20, the date on Gabriel's real ID as “Gabi Grassette” is given is April 23, 19*5.

They didn't want to give an exact date because Thomas and other creators don’t like give exact dates for show so they blacked out the middle number, but the storyboards show the date as 1985.

But that can't explain it fully because anything not shown in the show is not real , So much can be extracted from storyboards

Here Gabriel definitely looks like a pre-teenager , probably 14-15 years old

But if we have to go based on the information given to us :

Thomas Astruc said in a comic-end interview that he wanted to publish a comic in which he wanted to tell about Gabriel's life as a teenager and how he met people like Emilie and Nathalie

So this means that Gabriel met Emilie when he was a teenager and in Episode 24 show what Gabriel looks like when he meets Emilie in Felix's story

He has wavy hair and wears a blazer, freed from his old punk look with purple mohawk and he’s big enough to have its own apartment

18-19 is still a teenage age, but you are entitled to have your own apartment and explains the case of Emilie, who came to Paris for "study" , Emilie may have come to Paris for college or for the last year of high school or as a some kind of exchange student

According to Felix's, Emilie found true love "Immediately ”when she came to Paris , they probably decided to be together for less than one year and they got married quickly in the story

Also, in Episode 22, we learned that Audrey and Andre are really old friends of this couple and that's they are the ones made the two of them come together even Gabriel sewed his first suit to Andre so he could feel more confident in expressing his feelings to the girl he liked : Audrey

When Audrey and Andre were not together, Gabriel and Emilie were together and even lived in the same house as a married couple according to Andre’s “Do you remember when we were young and penniless? You, Me and Emilie would make the world a better place from yours little attic” in Episode 22

In an episode of Season 4, we see Andre and Audrey celebrate their 20th anniversary , so they have been married for at least 20 years and we also know that Gabriel and Emilie have been married longer

In the Weredad episode, we learn that Tom will turn 40 from 39, and we find out that Sabine and Tom have been married for 20 years , This information makes him married at 19-20, as confirmed by his Wiki page

So according to the Miraculous universe there are lot of people were married at that young

But I think Gabriel must be older than Tom because he has gray hair.

Gabriel and Emilie met in the story, they got married right away which makes me think that they married between the ages of 18-20, when Gabriel should have met her "when he was a teenager"

Now we all know that Emilie is inferitle , Gabriel said “For so long…We thought we would never able to have a child,” in final episode

They were married for a very long time until they have Adrien : Which makes sense because they were poor when they got married.

Gabriel was the son of a fast-food business owner who didn't come from a wealthy family anyway, and Emilie, on the contrary, was the heiress of a old-money and noble British aristocratic family and she was a “Lady”

Her parents were furious that she was with a ordinary man like Gabriel who were not the extremly wealthy and powerful man we know at the time so her parents wanted her to end this relationship and they probably had a plan in their mind for her to have a arranged marriage with a powerful and rich man just like they would do to her twin sister Amelie

But she choose him and they married poor , I guess they didn't even have a wedding because Felix showed off his parents' marriage with a fancy wedding, but Emilie simply split her ring in half and put it on Gabriel

But then we saw them living in the mansion we know now so they are pretty rich enough have to afford a huge mansion next to the Eiffel and they still don’t have a child so they didn't have a child from their poor to ultra-rich times, confirming Gabriel's "Too long time"

Also we know they are married more longer than Andre&Audrey who is married for 20 years

Of course, we cannot interpret Gabriel's "Long Time" perception, maybe 5 or 10 years

So if we collect all this information :

He married Emilie when he was a teenager who could have his own apartment so thats make him 18-19 and there are couples who get married so young in the series and he supposed to fell for and married with Emilie after a short time she came to Paris

They didn't have children for long, and that was long enough to go from poor to a multi-rich life (So maybe 5-10 years)

They look grown-ups here and never look like the teenagers-to-adult types so probably 30

And we know that Adrien is 14-15 years old and they're going to make Adrien there

And this is a series set in 2014-2015

and Marinette and Kagami's birth dates are 2000 and 2001, and Marinette and Kagami are where he talks about the Chinese zodiac signs

This means that confirms Gabriel's date of birth in the storyboard and yes Gabriel was born in 1970 , because the date 1985 is the date of issue of that identity, not the date of birth

This makes Gabriel 44-45 years old and possibly married with Emilie since 25 years

#gabriel agreste #emilie agreste #adrien agreste #nathalie sancoeur #gabenath #chat noir #mlb leaks #marinette dupain cheng #adrinette #ladynoir #marichat #ladrien #kagami tsuguri #felix fathom #feligami #alya cesaire #nino lahiffe #lila rossi #chloe bourgeois #zoe lee #alix kubdel #bunnyx #lukanette #miraculous spoilers #miraculous ladybug #miraculoustalesofladybugandcatnoir #miraculous fandom #mlb ladybug #hawkmoth #monarch

[grits-galraisedinthesouth]

Most of us don't believe they received any type of correspondence from the Grosvenor couple. Prior to seeing your results, I thought perhaps Sparry received a note; however by now all William's friends must know that any communications sent to Sparry will ultimately be published in a future megflop or megmoir.

Is it proper etiquette for British aristocrats to use save the date cards?

A Save the Date History written by Digby & Rose

"Emily Post is unquestionably the Mother of Etiquette and her 1922 book ‘Etiquette’ remains a popular and regularly updated handbook for even the most modern party host. Post (and her successive reigning Guardians of Etiquette) have always suggested giving guests plenty of notice, with the average timed invitation back in her day going out about three weeks before the Big Day. However, as people have become more widely connected, the need to give guests even more notice about a wedding date has become part of the New Normal. It is now more common to send out invitations 3 months in advance if Save The Dates have been sent. Often, the wedding date is determined by the availability of the couple’s chosen venue, which in some cases are booked for years in advance. This kind of planning has made it easier for couples to notify far flung friends and relatives with plenty of time for them to budget for travel expenses, book time off with their employer or make other plans needed for cross country or even international travel plans. And when you only know the date, it’s impossible to send out a real invitation with all the details. Enter the perfect solution – the Save the Date card."

#Grosvenor Wedding #Sparry burned every bridge #british royal family #megxit #liars #The Meghans #Harkle Frauds #save the date #Sparry #waaagh

[audreydoeskaren]

Hello, could you please do a review of Chinese Dress: From the Qing Dynasty to the Present Day by Valery Garett? Or at least give a perusal? It looks really good to a naked eye. There's clothes for different occasions, ethnic groups, and social classes. But it was also written by a white British woman, and from what I can tell her research comes from (stolen) collections in UK museums.

Also, I am confused about a passage on wedding dresses; she says Cantonese peasant women wore dark blue or black cotton for their weddings (pg 172), but I thought Chinese wedding dresses were traditionally red. (I am Chinese; I am an adoptee researching my culture; on a personal note, if it's true then I'm bummed because nobody deserves a boring wedding dress and red is so gorgeous)

Many thanks!

(Here's a pdf of the book for reference)

In my opinion, any book on Qing Dynasty fashion that uses a court dress laid flat as its cover image should be immediately dismissed, and that is exactly what I would say about this book. Unfortunately it's yet another ethnographic account coming from a white anthropological perspective, as you've identified, and is only useful if you want a caricature of your culture. Like most authors on Qing Dynasty fashion, Chinese or not, Garrett takes the 19th century as the starting date of the dynasty and offers absolutely no information on anything prior to that. This is because of both the lack of resources available to her from before western colonialism and the general framing of Qing Dynasty fashion; a common mistake, but not an excusable one. The erasure and misrepresentation of fashion in the PRC is disappointing. The book is from 2007 though, and it reads like other books from the same time, so it's not even bad in a unique way. I cannot stress this enough but please use recent literature wherever possible.

About the wedding dress thing, I wouldn't say there is one single 'traditional' color since formal wedding dresses of the Han upper classes during the Qing had multiple pieces and were not monochromatic. In the first half of the twentieth century, wedding qungua had a black jacket and red skirt, but were also embroidered with gold or silver. Blue and black were common colors for the working class in the 19th century, and it makes sense for peasant women to wear what was economical. Having fancy weddings that were a special occasion was, really, an aristocratic and bourgeois custom, and I assume working people often just couldn't be bothered.

This reminded me, I really should finish that series on Qing Dynasty Han women's fashion. Seeing published white authors be cringe with such audacity kind of motivates me.

#book review #qing dynasty

[emmashouldbewriting]

Oo Emma! I am SO chuffed that the Ton is shutting out the Sussexes with such force!!! The non-invite to the DoW wedding is HUGE. Actually bigger than people are realising! I wouldn’t be surprised AT ALL if this move has been sanctioned by the BRF since the Grosvenors & the BRF are historically intertwined.

If you haven’t been invited to the Grosvenor wedding, which is THE biggest wedding after the Harkles, not even 2024’s, then you truly & well are out.

Who was it, that said, “with the British Upper Classes, you don’t really know when you’re In, but you definitely know when you’re Out.”

yeah, 100%. it's not always about titles either, but about who you are and how you carry yourself. trust is what matters most.

as a writer, though, i am LIVING for this hahaha. my UK books are in my "aristoverse," aka the aristocratic universe (totally fictional) so these dynamics are the cheese to my toasties

[byzantine-suggestions]

@suburbanbeatnik OK SO:

As far as the “mixing up different historical eras” problem goes, this actually happens in a lot of different novels. Theodora by Samuel Edwards is the most blatant example I can think of at the moment—near the end of the book, a horde of Huns, inexplicably led by Khosrow, starts marching on Constantinople while Justinian is in his plague coma, and Theodora sells the crown jewels (I don’t believe the narrative specifies the buyer) to fund Belisarius and his troops, who are the city’s last defense. Khosrow is similar to Mehmed II, Theodora takes on the role of Anna of Savoy, and the overall political situation is implied to be very bad for Byzantium, with Constantinople on the brink of total failure and most of the empire's territory gone. (Like, there’s discussion of Justinian and Theodora meeting the invaders at the gates so they can die together, because they think the whole empire is collapsing.) The story does end with the Byzantines winning (using Greek fire, another anachronism), and Theodora gets her jewels back (I do not remember how), but yeah, the author completely blended two very different periods together. Different variants of this exact plot appear in different novels—a *lot* of books treat the 540s as politically similar to the 1200s or 1300s, and a *lot* of books have Theodora sell her crown for some reason or another, usually to fund the defense of the City or one of Justinian’s schemes. (One book–maybe one of the ones by Marié Heese? I can’t think of the title, sorry)—had her sell her jewels to fund the building of the Hagia Sophia. (She gets them back in that book, too—I think Narses literally just discovers an enormous stockpile of gold somewhere, and that fixes the financial problems.) And a lot of different books put Belisarius in a Heraclius or Basil-like role, although I’m less well-versed in Belisarius books than I am in Theodora books. (The Sarantine Mosaic by Guy Gavriel Kay definitely did this—the character of Leontes is pretty much Heraclius and Belisarius combined, while Valerius and Aliana are straightforward Justinian and Theodora equivalents, except for the fact Aliana is the equivalent of an iconodule rather than a Monophysite. But that gets a pass, imo, because it’s not pretending to be totally accurate.)

Religious inaccuracies and mixups are also really common overall, especially in older books. One Victorian-era book called Blue and Green, or the Gift of God: A Novel of Old Constantinople was very bad with this, presumably because the author was a British Protestant who made no secret of his disdain for the “pagan heathenism” of the Byzantine Empire. (His descriptions of religious ceremonies are very funny, because he describes them as, like, Christian ceremonies, if Christian ceremonies had strippers and drugs. The inciting incident of Theodora’s spiral into prostitution is her doing an erotic dance at a respectable, aristocratic wedding—not a bachelor party, an actual wedding—and this is presented as normal.) Really, you can probably just check out any Byzantine book from before, say, the 1980s on archive.org, and there’ll be weird religious anachronisms all over the place. Lots of authors bring iconoclasm or the East-West Schism (the one that happened in 1054) into the sixth century, I guess because those are more recognizable and dramatic than the Monophysite thing. Authors tend to put Justinian and Theodora on the opposite sides of these conflicts, and Theodora is usually on whatever side they consider “wrong,” which differs significantly from book to book depending on the author’s religious leanings.

Regarding the Theodora/Macedonia thing—Ross Laidlaw’s Justinian: The Sleepless One definitely did this (there were a couple of cringe sex scenes in this book—he always referred to Macedonia as “the other one,” I guess to avoid saying her name a bunch of times? It’d be like “Theodora felt the other one’s lips...” and so on. It sounded so strange.) Macedonia was Theodora’s main love interest—Theodora does marry Justinian, and she likes him well enough as a person, but she’s pretty explicitly gay and uninterested in men, and she has an affair with Macedonia until Macedonia dies in an earthquake. I believe Stella Duffy’s Actress, Empress, Whore duology also had Theodora and Macedonia hook up, but Duffy’s sex scenes were less fetishistic and cringeworthy, and their relationship didn’t last for the entirety of the novel. Theodora having sex (or sexually charged interactions) with Antonina, Macedonia and her other female friends is reasonably common in shitty Theodora novels in general, but it’s never, like, a plot point. It’s just an excuse for the author to write about attractive young women getting it on in the Roman baths, or whatever other fetish-y nonsense piques his interest.

These points aren’t even the weirdest things about most of these books, though. I should just sit down one day and do a full post about all of the absurd things that happen in Justinian and Theodora stories, because shit gets real weird in most of them. Messy historical anachronisms and fetish-y male-gaze lesbian sex scenes are nowhere near the strangest aspects of some of these books—remind me, one day, to talk about all of the Penis Diseases these authors invent to explain away Justinian and Theodora's infertility.

#penis disease segments #sexy Amalasuintha murder scenes #cringe Narses/Belisarius/Justinian/Theodora/Antonina love dodecahedrons #Evil Comito Bullshit #some of them give Theodora a fictional evil stepmother and stepsisters so she can be Cinderella #it's wild out there

[maturemenoftvandfilms]

Lord Ivar Mountbatten Born: March 9, 1963, London, United Kingdom Physique: Average Build

Lord Ivar Alexander Michael Mountbatten, DL is a British aristocrat, farmer, geologist and businessman. Although he is not a member of the official British royal family, he is the first member of the British monarch's extended family openly in a same-sex relationship, and upon marrying his partner James Coyle in 2018 was the first to have a same-sex wedding.

The so called "first gay royal," although technically not one, have three daughters with his former wife. In 2015, he converted their former home, Bridwell Park, into an exclusive-use venue for weddings, corporate functions, and business events. I don't know anything else about him, other than I want to fuck him. However, judging a book by it's cover, he looks to be the bottom in his marriage. And his husband looks like he could give a good dick. 

What? It's not like I'm imagining a three way between us. 

OK, you got me. I was.

#Lord Ivar Mountbatten #mydaddywiki royalty #mydaddywiki #celebrities

[fashionsfromhistory]

Robe a l'Anglaise

c.1747; Altered 1770s

British

Believed to have been worn as a wedding dress in 1747, this gown displays the exquisite patterning of English dress silks of the period, with delicate flowers and asymmetrical cartouches disposed in a graceful meander across an open ground. The ivory silk faille is brocaded with three types of silver thread, which add rich texture to the lively pattern. Sumptuous textiles such as this one signified wealth and were admired for the brilliant effects of light reflecting off their surfaces. The flat silver strip brocaded at the centers of the flower blossoms creates a coruscating effect, while the crinkled silver frisé of the stems produces a more restrained luster. Gowns of white and silver (both colors symbolizing purity) were fashionable in the mid-1700s among aristocratic and wealthy brides. Although altered in the 1770s, the dress remains a superb example of the lasting appeal of the era’s fine silks. (The MET)

The MET (Accession Number: 2014.138a, b)

Currently on view: In America: An Anthology of Fashion

#robe a l'anglaise #fashion history #historical fashion #1740s #1770s #18th century #rococo era #georgian era #georgian fashion #united kingdom #wedding dress #1747 #the met #up close

[i-just-look-at-pictures]

Grace's Wedding Dress

Something I see discussed so much on SM about Tommy and Grace's wedding is how 'horrible' her dress was or how frumpy/dowdy they made her, particularly in comparison to her S2 look and how she was dressed at the Gala.

Can we all take a step back for a moment and just assess WHY she wore such a modest wedding dress in such a formal colour? To quote the girl herself 'half of the British Army are downstairs'.

Grace comes from an EXTREMELY conservative, aristocratic, military family from whom she appears almost entirely estranged. We learn that the only reason they even attend her wedding isn't that her family love her or care about her or WANT to attend her wedding. No, they come out of respect for Tommy's war records.

Let's let that just settle for a moment. They would have allowed their niece who has NO FAMILY, NO PARENTS, NO SIBLINGS to marry alone because they don't like the man she is marrying.

Why is that? Not that it's ever explained but I would say it is safe to say they know she left her husband for Tommy. Her closest family know that, at least. No, they don't know Tommy is Charlie's biological Father (not that it takes a genius) but they know that she has been living in sin with him for a good amount of time and they do not approve, not in the slightest.

Grace knows this. Tommy knows this. It's partly why he hates them in his house so much. They have disrespected him and his wife before the wedding has even started by turning up in uniform DESPITE their request not to. Does Tommy kick them out? No. Does he say anything? No. Why? Because 'for Grace's sake, nothing will go wrong. Those BASTARDS out there are her family.'

Grace Burgess, who gave up everything to be with Thomas Shelby, tailored her entire wedding for the purpose of regaining the respect of her family. The hair? Reserved. The dress? Modest. The reception? Traditional. The venue? Her posh home. Charlie? Kept out the way.

She did everything she was supposed to and Tommy supported it because he knew how much it meant to her.

The wedding was meant to be out of character, the dress was meant to be boring. That was what she was going for.

She wanted them to like her again. The girl who had no one just wanted to be loved and respected by her family and those fuckers didn't give one shiny fuck. What hurts is that Tommy knew that and he didn't say a word. Just drank his wine and let her believe any of it made a difference.

On their wedding day we gain just the slightest perspective into what Grace's life was like before she met Tommy. Grace who grew up to become an undercover operative. Grace who loved so fucking hard. Grace who was fun and passionate and spirited was surrounded by those kinds of people. Stuck up, traditional, reserved, judgemental, horrible people. Perhaps also safe to say that's also what her parents were like.

And who stepped up? The Shelbys. Despite EVERYTHING. Who sat through the entire thing, supported her, supported their brother, respected the sanctity of her wedding day and fought to keep the fact the Russians had turned up from her? The Shelbys.

Polly fucking Grey cared more about Grace's well-being on her wedding day than her own family did and that? That is fucking devastating.

So no, it's not just an 'ugly' dress or a hairstyle. It's the fact that that night she is back to a silken nightie. It's the fact however many weeks later she is in a strapless fucking ballgown with a fuck off sapphire hanging from her chest as she schmoozes with Birmingham's elite.

It's the fact that when her boring family are downstairs, she's shagging the truth about international business dealings from her gangster husband whilst wearing glittery, diamond-encrusted garters under said reserved wedding dress.

That was Grace, the real Grace. The Grace Tommy (and we) fell in love with. It was nothing to do with poor taste. She wanted to appear respectable, just for the day.

The show completely whitewashes the HELL Grace would have gone through prior to her husband's suicide.

She could not file for divorce, women weren't allowed. She could not retain custody of her own child if she left her husband, he had to consent. Her name would have been published in the paper, she would have had to stand up in court and confess to adultery, her child was legally the property of her husband, she would have lost every asset that she brought into the marriage.

She would have been socially shunned, ridiculed, cast out of respectable society. But did she care? Not a jot. She loved Tommy, unconditionally, unwaveringly loved him and threw her life away to be with him. The bravery of that is unparalleled by any other character in the show and what makes it haunting is the reality of it. Grace Burgess was every woman in the 20th century who married the wrong man - stuck.

Grace is the most complex character in the show and you cannot convince me otherwise and she was snuffed out on a whim. She would have been magnificent. Damn you SK, damn you.

#grace burgess #grace shelby #tommy x grace

[charlotte-of-wales]

Royal Tiaras Highlights: Queen Silvia’s Modern Fringe Tiara

The tiara is believed to have been given as a 10th wedding anniversary from King Carl XVI Gustaf to Queen Silvia of Sweden in 1986. It’s possible that it once belonged to the Countess of Tankerville (the wife of a British aristocrat) who was pictured wearing a nearly identical piece. The Tankervilles are loosely related to the Swedish Royals, although the tiara could have been purchased through an auction or it could be an entirely different piece altogether, done in similar style.

The tiara can be turn into a necklace and it was worn publicly by Queen Silvia for the first time in 1991. The piece has been frequently worn by Queen Silvia and her daughters Crown Princess Victoria and Princess Madeleine. In fact, it was this tiara that Princess Madeleine choose to wear in her wedding day to Christopher O’Neil in 2013. It has been speculated that Queen Silvia gave the tiara to Madeleine but no official announcement has been made.

via The Court Jeweller

#tiaras highlights #royal tiaras #royal jewelry #royal jewels #swrf #swedish royal family #queen silvia #princess madeleine

[europesroyalsweddings]

✵ October 7, 1978 ✵

Natalia Phillips & Gerald Grosvenor, 6th Duke of Westminster

#great britain #british aristocracy #british aristocrat #aristocrat #wedding

[warwickroyals]

I shit you not I had to do the Marchioness of Bath for November (aka Emma Thynn, the UK's only Black peeress) because no actual royal wore anything I liked this November.

Wanna no something kinda fucked up? Despite being the daughter of a Nigerian oil billionaire and a British socialite, when Emma became engaged to her husband, her future in-laws were so damn racist that they straight-up boycotted the wedding and other family members were banned for making racist comments. Not joking.

So if you ever wonder why I often portray aristocrats in my story as total demons with extreme bigotry and no moral compass (Robin, Nadia, etc.) that's because that's how they are in real life. Still don't believe me? Google Lady Victoria Hervey.

#warwick.text #and that's why emma's mama called the former lady bath a ghastly racist bitch on national TV lmao #i love british aristotrash drama it's so fun

[duchessofostergotlands]

I very curious about Mary of Denmark’s wedding dress designer. I saw in your post that it was designed by Uffe Frank. Because I did love the dress, I went ahead checked his website, social pages etc… And man has even less followers my grandma, almost no online presence. It just seemed odd. This guy designed the crown princess’ then poof he is gone

It's an interesting conversation (that's code for: I'm about to ramble!). I honestly don't know anything about Uffe's career. I think there's two possibilities and I'll discuss them both.

Firstly, it's possible that his career is absolutely fine and he just doesn't prioritise an online presence. There's this unusual group of designers who pretty much exclusively create bespoke pieces for a limited clientele and have very little to no presence online because they don't have to. If everything you make is bespoke and all your clients are drawn from a small pool of aristocrats and public figures then most people in your target market will hear about you through word of mouth, not Instagram. It actually benefits them to remain exclusive and mysterious. There are other examples in this category like Pär Engsheden. He made Victoria's wedding dress, he's an incredibly respected designer. But he has no website and no social media that I know of at all. Or Bruce Oldfield. He has a basic website and less than 9k followers on Instagram. Yet he was one of Diana's favourites for years, he dresses Camilla now. Related to this I think sometimes profiles can grow organically but neither Bruce nor Uffe are verified. There are a few accounts on Instagram with Uffe's name so if he isn't actively building his account, people may not follow because they don't trust it's a real account.

The other alternative is that his brand is not doing so well or perhaps didn't grow. And I think this is interesting because we hear about the "Kate Effect" - you can insert any royal woman's name in there - where a royal wearing a piece instantly leads to it selling out. And there is some truth to it but I think the picture is more complex. For a start, brands almost never reveal the actual increase in sales that could be attributed to the royal. Maybe something sold out because it was already selling well and would have without the royal. And I also think that people wanting to buy a garment worn by a royal doesn't necessarily translate into being long term customers. If we look at some of the brands Kate wore a lot in 2011-2016, so many of them have folded or gone into administration. And I'm not for a second saying it's her fault - it's because the market now prefers cheap fast fashion or big designer brands so there's no foothold for the mid level brands - but it shows that a royal generating a lot of sales for one item doesn't necessarily give a brand long term financial health. Uffe is already on the back foot because he dressed a Danish royal almost 20 years ago rather than a British royal 10 years ago - the exposure he received will have been less, the time gap will mean more people have forgotten - but I think ultimately it's kind of like general internet culture. I've had posts go viral on Tumblr but it leads to absolutely no discernible increase in followers who stick around. You have to keep feeding the machine. It would be more surprising to me if Mary wore Uffe's stuff every week and he wasn't a big name, but honestly it doesn't surprise me to see him have a low profile despite making her wedding dress.

#crown Princess Mary #danish royal family #ask #anon

[pwlanier]

Muriel, Marquise de Chambrun wearing the tiara.

An extremely rare opal tiara from the family of the Late Jean Pierre François Joseph Pineton de Chambrun, Marquis de Chambrun, Marquis d'Amefreville (1903-2004) and his second wife Muriel.

LONDON.- Dreweatts will offer an extremely rare opal tiara from the family of the Late Jean Pierre François Joseph Pineton de Chambrun, Marquis de Chambrun, Marquis d'Amefreville (1903-2004) and his second wife Muriel, Marquise de Chambrun. Jean Pierre Pineton was the eldest son of French politician and diplomat Charles Louis Antoine Pierre Gilbert Pineton de Chambrun (1865-1954) and his American wife, Margaret Rives Nichols (1872-1949). Jean Pierre married his second wife Muriel in married in 1963 and they spent their 40-year marriage between France, the United States and the Algarve in Portugal.

The de Chambrun family has a prominent history as French politicians in the French Senate and French Chamber of Deputies and were direct descendants of Gilbert du Motier, Marquis de Lafayette (1757-1834), the French aristocrat and army officer who commanded American troops to victory in the American War of Independence. He was also a key figure in the French Revolution in 1789 and the July Revolution of 1830 and served in French parliament. Such was his impact that he was considered a national hero in both countries and gained the title of ‘Hero of Two Worlds’.

Jean Pierre and Muriel toured America lecturing about Lafayette and his role in the American Revolution and War of independence. Muriel also became a celebrated poetess and won several awards including Ohio Poet of the year in 1976 for her book of poems Sudden Spring and an award from Cincinnati University in 1970 for her first book Salisbury Cathedral. Jean Pierre and Muriel were fêted by American society and acknowledged by several American President's including Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and George Bush Junior for their work in promoting Franco-American relations.

Although profoundly deaf, Jean Pierre had studied biochemistry at the Institut Pasteur, and art at the Horace Vernet school. As a member of at the Cercle de l'Union Artistique in France, Jean Pierre became an acclaimed painter and designer of jewellery, wrought iron and crystal for the renowned firm Baccarat. With his background in jewellery, it is thought that the tiara was most probably designed by him. The tiara is exceptionally rare as it is set with opals, hardly ever seen in period tiaras, due to the stone’s fragility and also as some believed that opals held a strange power, that could bring bad luck to its wearer. This superstition was picked up in the British press, however it was eventually dismissed after it was a firm favourite with Queen Victoria, who during her reign owned multiple pieces of jewellery set with opals, which were said to have been the favourite gemstone of her husband, Prince Albert.

“To have a period tiara set with opals is extremely rare, as the opal stone is so fragile, with their composition mainly consisting of water and silica gel”, says Deputy Chairman and International Head of Jewellery, Silver and Watches at Dreweatts. “Of the very few other tiaras set with opals, is the Princess Marie of Denmark opal tiara, an exuberant Art Nouveau creation of large, towering opal set floral sprays. It has not been seen being worn in public since the wedding of King Harald V and Queen Sonja of Norway in 1968.”

The tiara in the sale is an exuberant piece of mid-20th century jewellery design. Opals are highly attractive stones due to their colour play, as they show all the colours of the rainbow. When rotated in light, one can see different flashes of colour, which are caused by the microscopic silica spheres in the stone. The most sought-after colours are red and green. Opals were traditionally found in Eastern Europe, in the Czech Republic and Slovakia. However, in the 1870s, they were discovered in Australia. Since then Australia has contributed to around 90% of the global output of precious opals. The best opals are found in Lightning Ridge, with others come from Queensland and New South Wales. A small percentage of stones also come from Ethiopia, America and Mexico, however these are not as commercially viable as the Australian examples.

The opals found in this stunning tiara are of exceptional quality and we can therefore assume that these originated from Australia.” says James Nicholson. They are set into 18 carat gold scrolled framework, complimented by circular cabochon, circular cut and step cut ruby accents, as well as rose cut and old mine cut diamonds, adding an extra sparkle. Adding to the uniqueness of this particular tiara, it is intended to be worn more like an ‘alice band’ across the middle of the head, rather than at the front. This adds significant height to it, making it a fabulous statement piece.

Courtesy Alain Truong

[tetsunabouquet]

and how do you feel about Zero's parents who killed an innocent person?

How do you feel about Ichiru who allowed his own parents to be killed?

Well, if we talk about the character Kuran, he did not make soldiers out of children (but only out of adults for noble purposes) and would not allow his parents to be killed, unlike ichira, and did not kill an innocent person like the parents of twins)). It's just that you're a fan of one particular character.). and zero can't be a prince as a low ranked vampire 😁 he is not an aristocrat, whether he is at least a hundred times the husband of the queen.

I could not pass by because it smells of hypocrisy here))

There's nothing hypocritical about this, it's clear that you are the biased fan over here. For one, the partner of a Queen if he is of lower rank or has no title at all will be rewarded with the title of Prince upon marriage. I'm Dutch, I live in a monarchy so I know. Gender flipped examples: Just look over at the British, Catherine isn't a noble at all yet she is the Princess of Wales. Our queen is Argentinian (so definitely not a noble at all) and was awarded the Princess title upon marriage (their wedding was years before the king's mother abdicated). Learn how monarchies work and get over it. He absolutely was intending to shape them into vampire hating killing machines. This is canon. Also, can I remind you Kaname is involved with the founding of the Hunters Association and they literally trained children and would sent minors on missions. He took in Seiren as his bodyguard when she was a little girl, her literal name is one big victim-blaming for her and her sister being brainwashed by evil vampires. He ABSOLUTELY trained and taught children to fight and defend his goals with their lives. He did not solely train adults, and what noble purposes? Most of the issues in this entire series wouldn't have happened if it weren't for his decisions! As the original vampire king, he's responsible for the very roots of vampire society and he lived long enough to see his efforts for goodness turn into something bad and corrupt. But instead of taking the blame for any decision he could have made that got the world where it was by HIMSELF, he created a literal plan to shove most of his burdens onto 12 year olds. If you find that excusable, then just get out of here because I don't have this blog just to get messages that make me want to puke with their favoritism of someone so heinous. Kaname is a monster, and I loathe child abusers like him with every fiber of my being.

Did I ever defend Zero's parents killing an innocent person? No, I actually criticized it. As we see in Memories, with vampires being so strong, it's difficult to get them to face justice, and whilst I feel like the arresting system could definitely improve, that is what I believe in. I don't believe in death sentence for humans either. Perhaps I'd make an exception for a monster like Hitler or Genghis Khan, but no- in essence I am against death sentences. About Ichiru, first of all, Juri and Haruka aren't Kaname's parents. He was the original vampire king and he already wanted to protect them with his life because they were his descendants, just like Rido was and as their ancestor and senior it was his responsibility to take care of the situation. Kaname was the actual patriarch of the Kuran clan the moment he started regaining his memories and he already remembered who he was by the time Rido came to the Kuran family for Yuki. Secondly, I won't judge Ichiru. What he did was terrible, but he was a little boy in a very dark place. His parents and the hunters literally made him feel like his existence was a burden, even though his parents also loved him. His parents weren't the best out there, and it affected Ichiru in the most negative way possible. I was actually born with health issues myself aside from my autism, and I can understand some of the bitterness Ichiru displays towards his health conditions limiting his life. On top of the way it makes him essentially unwanted by everyone, it sent him into a very hateful place. When you mix that with being as immature as 12 years old, and approached by Shizuka who did take some notes out of the predator-grooming book and further isolated him from his parents, that was pretty much asking for something terrible to happen. Seriously, how can it be hypocritical of me to not judge a 12 year old when I am speaking of a character that the series implied multiple times was already mentally an adult when Rido attacked the Kuran household. Ichiru never trained children either, so... Fuck, being 17, Ichiru technically DIED as a child, and who is to blame?... Oh yeah, Kaname Kuran because if he hadn't allowed Shizuka back out of her cage to kill the Kiryus, none of that would have happened.

#vk #vampire knight #kaname kuran #ichiru kiryu #zero kiryu #shizuka #rido #juri #haruka #the kuran family #kate middleton #seriously nobody ever bothers to learn how titles work #queen maxima

[jechristine]

It’s crazy to me how people are still on about that Oprah interview as Meghan complaining about wearing jewelry and living in palaces. It’s like, first of all she didn’t live in the palace and she got blasted every time she wore minimal jewelry so there’s that. But also, I’m always thinking, did we watch the same interview? Where she admitted she almost killed herself and her unborn child because of media abuse? Where she said the palace took away their security and then leaked their location in Canada after they left and she begged them not to because there are people who want them dead? All as a response to being violently spoken about in media for almost five years by then? It’s insane that all some people took away from that was “she had a privileged life as a royal but then left and is now complaining about it in a pandemic where people are dying because some people were mean to her” like it’s that simple. This is in opposition to the fact that she and Harry were invited to the UN thing for Mandela (who they probably all would’ve hated when he was alive).

Anyone who knows Meghan’s story knows that she never for even one day experienced royal “perks” without accompanying racist, classist abuse. It wasn’t a ‘she liked it before she didn’t situation’ because there was no before. Harry had to put out an unprecedented letter himself, begging the media to back off the abuse, one week after their relationship was leaked in 2016. His own brother scorned Meghan and probably started leaking against her before the wedding. Another family member thought it okay to display her racism openly, tauntingly, in Meghan’s presence by wearing racist jewelry. People think of the British royals as the top of the food pyramid, but really Meghan would have done better to fall in love with some lesser, run-of-the-mill aristocrat or just some nouveau riche person that didn’t require she be thrust onto the international stage with a target on her back to perform like a trained pet. She herself was already a self-made millionaire when we met Harry, and her relocation from her Toronto house to Harry’s 2-bedroom “NotCot” was a downsizing. If people think wearing dresses in the BRF is fun, they did not watch the tabloids scrutinize every way she was “breaking protocol” (a mantra seemingly reserved for Meghan) or supposedly humiliating herself with the wrong hat or whatever the fuck every time she left the house, which ended up not being too much because she was supposedly “overexposed” just existing (i.e. overshadowing Kate Middleton). If she wanted anything from her Royal position it was, as I blogged earlier, to get a bigger platform to use for as much good as she could. And she continues to use it for that more effectively now anyway.

But Meghan is important too because she is a symbol for how how non-white, non-aristocratics are regarded when they get close to the family that for better or worse still represents Britishness to Britain and to the world, as their chief function. Not well.

Anyhow Mandela’s family and Foundation invited Harry to speak today, so they obviously think his work and support is valuable. So who cares what ignorant people think.