Because of “political sensitivities,” it has been rumored that plans for the Queen Consort to be crowned wearing regalia featuring the contentious Koh-i-Noor diamond may be scrapped.
According to Mail+, when the King initially brought up the subject of his wife sitting by his side during his coronation, it was tentatively decided that she would be declared Queen Consort using the late Queen Mother’s crown.
The costly item has 2,800 diamonds in total, with the 105-carat Koh-i-Noor diamond, one of the biggest cut diamonds in the world, resting on the front cross.
However, according to information obtained by the Mail, there is now “great concern” about this because of the ongoing dispute over who really owns the diamond, which originated in India but is now also claimed by the republic and a number of other nations in the area.
The jewel, which is mounted in a removable platinum frame, may now be removed from the crown before wearing it, or the crown can be skipped altogether in favor of a simpler accessory like Queen Victoria’s coronet.
According to a source, after her husband succeeded to the throne, the Queen Consort was supposed to be crowned with the late Queen Mother’s crown.
When the concept of the Duchess of Cornwall becoming the Queen Consort was originally brought up a few years ago, that was unquestionably the understanding.
But things have changed, and both His Majesty the King and his advisers are well aware of these challenges. Particularly with relation to India, there are substantial political sensitivities and anxiety in the area.
Today, Buckingham Palace chose not to comment.
Next year’s coronation will take place on May 6, palace officials confirmed Tuesday, adding that further information about the event, which will combine traditional and contemporary elements, would be released in due time.
Regalia, in especially the crown worn by the Queen Consort, will probably prove to be contentious.
It was created in 1937 for Queen Elizabeth, King George VI’s consort, utilizing several stones from the royal collection. The majority of the diamonds from Queen Victoria’s Regal Circlet have been taken out.
The Koh-i-noor diamond was once again reset for this crown after previously being installed in the crowns of Queen Alexandra and Queen Mary.
For the time of King George VI, Queen Elizabeth wore the crown without its arches during State Openings of Parliament. She also wore it again in 1953 during the coronation of her daughter, Queen Elizabeth II.
Even though it is hard to pinpoint the diamond’s specific origin, India is without a doubt the country where it was found. The oldest mention seems to be from 1628 and refers to a great Mughal emperor.
Before being purchased by Britain in 1849, it returned to India in 1813 and established itself as a formidable symbol of authority.
The diamond was presented to Queen Victoria by the last Sikh ruler, 10-year-old Duleep Singh, in 1855.
The fact that it was ‘gifted’ to this nation has received a lot of attention, but detractors point out that it was only after the mother of the ten-year-old Punjabi heir was imprisoned and coerced to sign it away.
After that, Queen Victoria made it a prized property, and she put it on exhibit at the London Great Exhibition in 1851.
Now then, it has been a source of contention between the UK and India as well as a number of other countries. It has since been added to the Crown Jewels.
It is not a trivial delicate matter in the eyes of India, according to William Dalrymple, who co-wrote Koh-i-Noor: The History of the World’s Most Famous Diamond with colleague Anita Anand. A huge diplomatic grenade, that is.
We feel that no one in this nation has the smallest idea of how important it is in India, which is one of the reasons we published our book.
For some individuals in this place, the term refers to the name of an Indian restaurant, a particular brand of pencils, or even something they saw when visiting the Tower of London with their school.
However, it is essentially a part of a larger divide including a variety of issues related to colonialism that Indians find very upsetting.
The Taliban, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, and other nations have all made claims to the diamond.
It is a very delicate stone that is often used. It is important to a vast number of people and has been very contentious ever since the Queen passed away.
There is a belief that this is a problem that will resurface. Colonialism is past, and because India is a significant new growing power, Britain wants to be friendly with it.
At a way, the British brought this on themselves by displaying the stone in the Great Exhibition of 1851, turning it into a symbol of their dominion.
Whether intentionally or unintentionally, it has subsequently come to represent for many colonized people what they believe we have stolen from them. No matter how you feel about it, that is how it is perceived.
This little stone, which is really not that huge and is no longer among the top 100 diamonds in the world, has come to bear the whole burden of colonization on its shoulder. It has grown to be a highly delicate subject and is now a significant problem between the two nations.
The inclusion of the diamond in next year’s coronation would ‘fly in the face’ of any attempts by the Royal Family to ‘draw a line under imperialism,’ according to author and political analyst Saurav Dutt, who spoke to the Mail.
In his words, “keeping the Koh-i-Noor front and center in the public view this manner flies in the face of any effort by the Royal Family and political orthodoxies to draw a line under the dispossession, discrimination, looting, and exploitation that imperialism delighted in.”
‘Such a viewpoint is at contrast with the contemporary, egalitarian posture the Royals strive to portray themselves in a society that tries to move on from the most repulsive chapters of history from which they benefitted,’ the author writes.
The display of this diamond in such a manner, he said, can only serve to upset the public and serve as a reminder of the dubious connection between Britain and India. Such a stance is unworkable as both parties work to strike profitable trade agreements after Brexit.
From a public relations standpoint, “improving ties between the ruler and the ruled must offset the unsavoury optics of cavorting about with this seized treasure.”