The Cullinan diamond – the largest diamond ever found – is just one of the many diamonds that will be in the spotlight during the coronation ceremony.
It again entered the public eye when cuts of the original diamond sat atop the royal sceptre and in Queen Camilla’s crown, where it was substituted for the even more controversial diamond, the Koh-i-noor.
Here’s a look back at its history – and why those two jewels, in particular, are so controversial.
Who was Thomas Cullinan?
Thomas Cullinan, a businessman who worked in South Africa, is known for giving his name to the largest diamond ever discovered in the country.
He moved to Johannesburg in 1887, where he first became a bricklayer and after earning some money, he found an interest in sales and business.
Advertisement
In 1897, Cullinan moved to Parktown, where he discovered the Premier diamond fields a year later.
Cullinan soon became the co-founder of what came to be The Transvaal Chamber of Industries – a mining-industry employer organisation.
He continued to grow in his career and in 1910, Cullinan was knighted for his work in the diamond industry.
How did the diamond end up in the UK?
According to the Cape Town Diamond Museum, the diamond was first discovered at the Premier Mine in Pretoria, South Africa, by Fedrick Wells in 1905.
The Cullinan diamond was only a fragment of an even bigger stone that was still not yet discovered – it weighed 3,106 carats (621.2 grams).
The stone was carefully sent off to England and to keep it safe, detectives from London were asked to send out replicas and decoys in public to throw off potential thieves.
After the Anglo-Boer War, the South African Transvaal government bought the diamond from Cullinan and later presented and gifted it to Britain’s King Edward VII in 1907.
What are Cullinan I and Cullinan II?
Image: The Imperial State Crown which contains the Cullinan II diamond
The diamond was then entrusted to what is now known as The Royal Asscher Diamond Company.
King Edward VII invited the Asscher brothers to London to discuss cutting the diamond into different pieces.
The original diamond was “the size of a human heart”, the Royal Asscher website says.
After months of careful planning and studying, it was decided that Joseph Asscher who founded the company would cleave the Cullinan into nine major stones and 96 smaller stones.
There were two diamonds amongst those that weighed the most.
These were known as the Cullinan I and Cullinan II.
Image: King Edward VII of England. Pic: AP
Cullinan I became known as the Star of Africa and Cullinan II became known as The Lesser Star of Africa.
In 1910, after King Edward’s death, King George V had the Cullinan I and Cullinan II set in the sovereign’s sceptre and Imperial State Crown respectively.
The 96 smaller stones were given to the Asschers as their fee for cutting the diamond.
‘The diamond’s gift in 1907 was controversial’
As the royals prepare their Crown Jewels for the upcoming ceremony, the question of right and wrong surrounds them – with growing calls for the royals to return the cuts of the diamond to their homeland.
Dr Matt Graham, a senior lecturer in African history at the University of Dundee, said: “The journey of this diamond [The Cullinan] from South Africa to the monarchy is part of imperial networks, empire, and colonial rule, where resources from across the world were extracted for the benefit of Britain.
“There are demands within South Africa for reparations and the return of the gem because it is a powerful symbol of empire.”
Read more on Sky News:
Image: A brooch containing Cullinan cuts was on display at Buckingham Palace in 2012. Pic: Reuters
After the death of Queen Elizabeth II, both the Cullinan I and II were placed on display.
While the late Queen was laid to rest, criticism arose of the late monarch for never formally apologising for Britain’s colonial past in South Africa.
And so, the Cullinan diamond remains wrapped in the timeline of colonial history, which raises the question of whether the cuts of it should return to the land where the original stone was found.
Last year, activists in South Africa also petitioned for the cuts to be returned and placed in a South African museum instead.
Professor Saul Dubow from the faculty of history at the University of Cambridge told Sky News the Cullinan diamond was controversial, but it also played a role in the dispute within “white politics”.
He said: “The diamond’s gift in 1907 was controversial, but it was principally a matter of dispute within white politics, specifically, about the gift as a gesture to win the support of the Crown and British Liberal opinion in the aftermath of the Boer War.”
Image: Queen Mary’s Crown, which will contain cuts of the Cullinan diamond when it is worn by Camilla at her coronation, is seen in 1952
Professor Dubow said the hope at the time was that “this would facilitate reconciliation between English and Dutch-speakers. Further Cullinan stones were gifted to Queen Mary by the new South African government of Louis Botha and Jan Smuts – both of whom had fought against British imperialism – on the achievement of independence from Britain in 1910.”
He continued: “Political union was indeed achieved at the cost of black South Africans. But it is hard to see a direct connection between the gift of the diamond and the loss of African rights.
“Some campaigners are now arguing that the diamond should be restored to Africa because it came out of African soil and that the colonial government had no right to give it away in the first place.
“The crown’s designation of the Cullinan as the ‘Great Star of Africa’ may thus be an unintentional hostage to fortune!”
What is the Koh-i-noor diamond and why is it controversial?
Earlier this year, Buckingham Palace released a statement confirming the Koh-i-noor diamond would not be worn by the Queen Consort.
The East India Company seized the historic treasure in 1849 when it was presented to Queen Victoria and became part of the Crown Jewels.
The Koh-i-noor diamond, also known as “Mountains of Light” in Persian, has also been the centre of controversy over the years with political and legal disputes regarding its original owner.
In 2016 the All India Human Rights and Social Justice Front, a non-governmental organisation, filed a lawsuit seeking its return.
However, Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar told India’s Supreme Court in New Delhi it was given to Queen Victoria in 1850 by a 19th-century Sikh king.
“It was given voluntarily by Ranjit Singh to the British as compensation for help in the Sikh Wars. The Koh-i-noor is not a stolen object,” he said.
But the debate of ownership and its painful past continues to this day.
A spokesman for Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party reportedly said last year – before the decision was made to remove it: “The coronation of Camilla and the use of the crown jewel Koh-i-noor brings back painful memories of the colonial past.
“Most Indians have very little memory of the oppressive past. Five to six generations of Indians suffered under multiple foreign rules for over five centuries.
“Recent occasions, like Queen Elizabeth II’s death, the coronation of the new Queen Camilla and the use of the Koh-i-noor does transport a few Indians back to the days of the British Empire in India,” he added.
The King’s Coronation
Image: King Charles III crowned with St Edward’s Crown
Queen Camilla was crowned with Queen Mary’s Crown – reset with cuts of the Cullinan diamond – which was originally commissioned for the coronation of Mary of Teck as Queen Consort at the coronation of King George V in 1911.
Image: Queen Camilla crowned with Queen Mary’s Crown
The King was crowned with the St Edward’s Crown, a solid gold crown set with precious stones. The crown weighs 2.23kg (nearly 5 lbs).
Four people have been charged after £7m of damage was caused to two Voyager aircraft at RAF Brize Norton.
The investigation into the incident early on Friday 20 June was led by counter-terror police.
They have been charged with conspiracy to enter a prohibited place knowingly for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or interests of the UK – and conspiracy to commit criminal damage.
Image: Two Voyager aircraft at RAF Brize Norton were damaged. PA file pic
The four charged have been identified as:
• Amy Gardiner-Gibson, 29, of no fixed abode
• Daniel Jeronymides-Norie, 35, from London
• Jony Cink, 24, of no fixed abode
More from UK
• Lewie Chiaramello, 22, from London
They will appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court later today.
A 41-year-old woman arrested last week on suspicion of assisting an offender has been released on bail until 19 September.
Meanwhile, a 23-year-old man detained on Saturday was released without charge.
Last month’s incident at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire was claimed by the activist group Palestine Action.
Rachel Reeves has not offered her resignation and is “going nowhere”, Downing Street has said, following her tearful appearance in the House of Commons.
A Number 10 spokesperson said the chancellor had the “full backing” of Sir Keir Starmer, despite Ms Reeves looking visibly upset during Prime Minister’s Questions.
A spokesperson for the chancellor later clarified that Ms Reeves had been affected by a “personal matter” and would be working out of Downing Street this afternoon.
UK government bond prices fell by the most since October 2022, and the pound tumbled after Ms Reeves’s Commons appearance, while the yield on the 10-year government bond, or gilt, rose as much as 22 basis points at one point to around 4.68%.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch branded the chancellor the “human shield” for the prime minister’s “incompetence” just hours after he was forced to perform a humiliating U-turn over his controversial welfare bill.
Emotional Reeves a painful watch – and reminder of tough decisions ahead
It is hard to think of a PMQs like it – it was a painful watch.
The prime minister battled on, his tone assured, even if his actual words were not always convincing.
But it was the chancellor next to him that attracted the most attention.
Rachel Reeves looked visibly upset.
It is hard to know for sure right now what was going on behind the scenes, the reasons – predictable or otherwise – why she appeared to be emotional, but it was noticeable and it was difficult to watch.
Speaking at Prime Minister’s Questions, Ms Badenoch said: “This man has forgotten that his welfare bill was there to plug a black hole created by the chancellor. Instead they’re creating new ones.”
Turning to the chancellor, the Tory leader added: “[She] is pointing at me – she looks absolutely miserable.
“Labour MPs are going on the record saying that the chancellor is toast, and the reality is that she is a human shield for his incompetence. In January, he said that she would be in post until the next election. Will she really?”
Not fully answering the question, the prime minister replied: “[Ms Badenoch] certainly won’t.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:58
Welfare vote ‘a blow to the prime minister’
“I have to say, I’m always cheered up when she asks me questions or responds to a statement because she always makes a complete mess of it and shows just how unserious and irrelevant they are.”
Mrs Badenoch interjected: “How awful for the chancellor that he couldn’t confirm that she would stay in place.”
A total of 49 Labour MPs voted against the bill – the largest rebellion in a prime minister’s first year in office since 47 MPs voted against Tony Blair’s Lone Parent benefit in 1997, according to Professor Phil Cowley from Queen Mary University.
After multiple concessions made due to threats of a Labour rebellion, many MPs questioned what they were voting for as the bill had been severely stripped down.
They ended up voting for only one part of the plan: a cut to Universal Credit (UC) sickness benefits for new claimants from £97 a week to £50 from 2026/7.
Ms Badenoch said the climbdown was proof that Sir Keir was “too weak to get anything done”.
Ms Reeves has also borne a lot of the criticism over the handling of the vote, with some MPs believing that her strict approach to fiscal rules has meant she has approached the ballooning welfare bill from the standpoint of trying to make savings, rather than getting people into work.
Experts have now warned that the welfare U-turn, on top of reversing the cut to winter fuel, means that tax rises in the autumn are more likely – with Ms Reeves now needing to find £5bn to make up for the policy U-turns.
Asked by Ms Badenoch whether he could rule out further tax rises – something Labour promised it would not do on working people in its manifesto – Sir Keir said: “She knows that no prime minister or chancellor ever stands at the despatch box and writes budgets in the future.
“But she talks about growth, for 14 years we had stagnation, and that is what caused the problem.”
Prosecutors are considering whether to bring further criminal charges against Lucy Letby over the deaths of babies at two hospitals where she worked
The Crown Prosecution Service said it had received “a full file of evidence from Cheshire Constabulary asking us to consider further allegations in relation to deaths and non-fatal collapses of babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital and Liverpool Women’s Hospital”.
“We will now carefully consider the evidence to determine whether any further criminal charges should be brought,” it added.
“As always, we will make that decision independently, based on the evidence and in line with our legal test.”
Letby, 35, was found guilty of murdering seven children and attempting to murder seven more between June 2015 and June 2016 while working in the neonatal unit of the Countess of Chester Hospital and is currently serving 15 whole-life orders.
Image: Letby worked at the Countess of Chester Hospital and Liverpool Women’s Hospital
She is understood to have carried out two work placements at Liverpool Women’s Hospital, where she trained as a student, between October and December 2012, and January and February 2015.
Police said in December that Letby was interviewed in prison as part of an investigation into more baby deaths and non-fatal collapses.
A Cheshire Constabulary spokesperson said: “We can confirm that Cheshire Constabulary has submitted a full file of evidence to the CPS for charging advice regarding the ongoing investigation into deaths and non-fatal collapses of babies at the neo-natal units of both the Countess of Chester Hospital and the Liverpool Women’s Hospital as part of Operation Hummingbird.”
Detectives previously said the investigation was looking into the full period of time that Letby worked as a nurse, covering the period from 2012 to 2016 and including a review of 4,000 admissions of babies.
Letby’s lawyer Mark McDonald said: “The evidence of the innocence of Lucy Letby is overwhelming,” adding: “We will cross every bridge when we get to it but if Lucy is charged I know we have a whole army of internationally renowned medical experts who will totally undermine the prosecution’s unfounded allegations.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:09
Three managers at the hospital where Lucy Letby worked have been arrested on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter.
Earlier this year, Letby’s lawyers called for the suspension of the inquiry, claiming there was “overwhelming and compelling evidence” that her convictions were unsafe.
Their evidence has been passed to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which investigates potential miscarriages of justice, and Letby’s legal team hopes her case will be referred back to the Court of Appeal.