if you were kate middleton...

[gina32]

... would you be pleased with your mother in laws engagement ring? i know i wouldnt!

[gina32]

why

[DTCwordfan]

a 22 carat diamond ring - even allowing for a simple Victorian cut, it must be worth a fortune - and given that the pink diamond went yesterday for 29 mill in Geneva

[Barmaid]

Well it cost Charlie £28k in 1981 so Lord knows what it is worth now - particularly with its provenance.

My FH has his mother's wedding ring. The marriage was an utter disaster. When we got engaged he considered having it altered for me. Much as I loved the idea, I thought it was impractical. I still thought it was a lovely idea.

[oscarina]

His mother adored her two sons and she was tragically taken away from them, the memory lives on and William doesn't want to ever forget her so giving the ring to Kate will always remind him of Diana
I expect they discussed the ring beforehand and if Kate wasn't happy I am sure she would have said. It is a beautiful gesture. Also I think Kate resembles Diana a lot.

[netibiza]

I had my grandmother in law's wedding band but it was 24 carat gold so not too hard done by!

[smudge]

lol DT,- let's put it this way, we couldn't afford a lot back in '64, so didn't pay the earth for it. However it is indeed worth a small fortune now - for insurance purposes!

Anyway, it wouldn't make an atom of difference how much it's worth, as it will go to our youngest daughter when I pop off! Eldest daughter will be given my 22 gold wedding band! ;o/

[sara3]

smudge, I think DT (and I) thought you meant it was a 22 carat diamond.

and that would be worth seeing ;o)

[smudge]

22 carat that is!

[smudge]

Yeah, I realised that after sara, that's why I said "lol DT". ;o}

[smudge]

Blimey, if that was the case, I would have sold it by now & given the money to our two girls & grankids! ;o}

[smudge]

or Grandkids!

[smudge]

Me again - meant to say "Hi, to Neti" Hope you are well. ^8^ ♥

[Zeuhl]

Surely the creepy associations and ill-omened aspects of this ring are that it was given by Charles to Diana;

Not as a symbol of love and the beginning of a marriage that later failed

But as a symbol of deceit and the beginning of a marriage that for her was one of love and for him was one of convenience, as he had his real love Camilla on the side already.

It must be a reminder of a particularly sordid and shameful episode even by the standards of The House of Windsor.
.

[sara3]

OMG, it's a piece of jewellery!

[Zeuhl]

sara

Yes it's an engagement ring. Similar to a wedding ring.

Doesn't that give it some significance or do you think it's the same as any old brooch, bracelet or earrings?

"And with this pair of diamante ear studs I do thee wed" LOL
.

.

[sara3]

I wouldn't call is creepy and ill-omened!

it was his mother's ring and therefore evidently of sentimental value to him.

I'm divorced but as it happens, my wedding ring is beautiful and I would be happy if either of my children wanted to make use of it.

[sara3]

*sorry, I should have pointed out that my wedding ring is from a failed marriage.

I blame the ring, of course ;o)

[smudge]

I agree sara!

I'm sure William & Kate are only thinking of the positive issues, not the negative ones! Good luck to them both & we wish them many years of wedded bliss! ♥

[boxtops]

Gina, it's neither one way or the other to me, but Charles met Camilla years before he married Diana (who fitted the virginal mould required for the wife of the heir to the throne) - they've known each other a very long time. If you ever saw the "three in this marriage" TV interview, I don't think Charles ever stopped seeing her. Traditional in the Royal Family from years gone by, to have a wife and an mistress on the side. IMO Diana wasn't the one to make the first move re seeing someone else, as you suggest. All water under the bridge now, anyway.....

[smudge]

Agree to your 17:15 post sara! ;o}