King Charles coronation: Camilla to wear Queen Mary’s crown without controversial Koh-i-Noor diamond
The Queen Consort Camilla will wear Queen Mary’s crown at King Charles’s coronation, without the controversial Koh-i-Noor diamond over concerns it would serve as an unwelcome reminder of the British Empire.
The crown has been removed from display at the Tower of London for modification work ahead of the ceremony in May.
This is the first time in almost three centuries that an existing crown will be used for the coronation of a consort instead of a new commission being made.
Camilla, who has cancelled her engagements this week after testing positive for COVID, is said to have made the decision to wear the Crown of Queen Mary in the interests of sustainability and efficiency.
The King and Queen Consort
The crown was originally commissioned for the coronation of Mary of Teck as Queen Consort at the coronation of King George V, the present monarch’s great-grandfather, in 1911.
Some changes and additions will be made by the Crown Jeweller, in keeping with the tradition that jewels are inserted uniquely, especially for the occasion, and to reflect the wearer’s individual style.
She will pay tribute to the late Queen by replacing the Koh-i-Noor gem with the Cullinan III, IV and V diamonds, which were often worn as brooches by the previous monarch.
Read more
Queen Consort Camilla tests positive for COVID
What will happen at the King’s coronation?
In addition to the diamonds, four of the crown’s eight detachable arches will be removed, giving the headpiece a different silhouette from when it was worn by Queen Mary at the 1911 coronation.
Camilla chose to modify the existing crown, rather than commission a new one as is customary, to be more sustainable, Bucking Palace said.
George V and Queen Mary in their coronation robes
St Edward’s Crown, which will be used for the coronation of the King, has returned to public display at the Tower of London now its modifications are complete.
The crash involving a cargo ship and oil tanker off the East Yorkshire coast is bad news for the sea, fish and air in the area. What we don’t know yet is quite how bad it will be.
That depends on a few things – but the speed of the collision, clouds of filthy black smoke from the fires and the leaked fuel are certainly worrying.
Firstly, it matters what was on board those two massive vessels.
Follow live: Jet fuel spilling into sea after tanker collision
Analytics firm Vortexa estimates the 183m-long tanker was carrying about 130,000 barrels of jet fuel (kerosene), which is now leaking into the sea.
Jet fuel is not as sticky or viscous as heavier types of oil, thankfully, so it’s less likely to clog the feathers and fur of birds and seals. It can also be broken down by natural bacteria.
But it can still poison fish and kill animals and plants on the shoreline if it makes its way into the soil there.
The Marine Conservation Society has pointed out the site in the Humber estuary is close to some protected areas and is important for seabirds and harbour porpoises.
And both ships will have been powered by a dirtier, heavier kind of oil – likely marine gas oil or heavy fuel oil, though we don’t know the details yet.
Heavy fuel oil is nasty stuff.
Pic: Bartek Smialek/PA
Cheap, thick and tar-like, it can smother animals and is very dangerous if they consume it, and is extremely difficult to clean up. Let’s hope this isn’t creeping around the North Sea already.
We don’t know how much of either the jet fuel or the oil powering the ships has leaked, or how much will be burned off in the violent fires – which themselves are ploughing black smoke and filthy air pollution into the surrounding atmosphere.
And we don’t know for sure what was on the Solong cargo ship and if, or what, will go into the sea.
Cargo ship ‘had sodium cyanide on board’
It was carrying 15 containers of sodium cyanide among other cargo, according to a report from maritime data provider Lloyd’s List Intelligence.
The container vessel was also transporting an unknown quantity of alcohol, said the casualty report – an assessment of incidents at sea – citing a message from the local coastguard.
Plastic takes hundreds of years to break down, and potentially can choke or trap animals.
Many of us have seen that uncomfortable viral video of a turtle having a straw yanked out of its nose. Previous accidents on cargo ships have seen plastic Lego pieces wash up in Cornwall 25 years later.
Read more:
How UK North Sea platforms dump gas
Secondly, the impact depends on the sea and weather conditions around it.
Things like the wind and currents affect how an oil spill spreads in the sea. Scientists can draw up computer models to simulate how the oil could behave.
Thirdly, it matters how quickly this is all tackled and then cleaned up, if necessary, and if it can be.
Usually the slower the response, the worse the impact.
The coastguard has said the incident “remains ongoing” and it has started assessing the “likely counter pollution response” that will be required.
Such a response might need the help of numerous public bodies: the government environment department, the transport department, the Environment Agency and the Maritime and Coastguard Agency.
So for now the best we can hope for – aside from the welfare of the people involved – is that not all the oil is spilled or burnt, that conditions are calm and that rescuers and those cleaning up can work swiftly.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports11 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports3 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business2 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway