Whenever monarchs wore crowns of rare metals and such, were the crowns ever redesigned or reshaped to fit the next person who took it up?
If so, were such changes frowned upon for potentially damaging the crown just because the new owner could not cope with the minor discomfort when they're expected to rule over all?
Hi! I have an answer to an earlier question that I think will help you out:
Here's the most relevant bit:
[Some kingdoms did have crowns passed down from monarch to monarch, but rarely with importance attached to individual material crowns.] Crown-wearing was an activity limited to very specific occasions--coronation, wedding, major feast days, knighting ceremonies for the most important young noblemen...or Frederick Barbarossa parading into the church in the Jerusalem he'd negotiated from Saladin, donning the crown as King of Jerusalem basically to anger the pope.
And yet it was typical of kings and queens to possess a whole host of crowns, some made specifically for them, some inherited from a parent or relative. If one didn't fit, well, there were plenty more whether that came from--Isabella of France received twelve crowns as gifts on her wedding day alone.
There was nothing specifically "royal" about crowns like these, except when they were in the possession of the monarch. Blanche of Navarre, queen to Philip VI of France very very briefly in the 14th century (he died fast), willed eight crowns to her goddaughters--including one that, her will notes, she lent out to female friends to wear at their own weddings.
And, interestingly, there was nothing particularly gendered about individual crowns, either. Philip willed all of his crowns except for one to Blanche; the one he reserved for his son had sentimental value, since Philip had worn it to John's knighting. And Philip's first wife, Jeanne, split her crowns between her son and her daughter.
But her daughter got all her books.