Alexander Palace Forum

Discussions about the Imperial Family and European Royalty => The Windsors => Topic started by: Forum Admin on March 31, 2006, 07:43:47 PM

Title: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Forum Admin on March 31, 2006, 07:43:47 PM
My sincere apologies, but in trying to remove some horrible porno spam put into this thread, I accidentally deleted the whole thing. I'm really and truly sorry,  :-/  I guess I have some more getting used to with the new software too. Again, my apologies, I really only meant to delete the posts, not the whole thread.

FA.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: B5218 on March 31, 2006, 07:59:04 PM
As someone who works with computers ... Been there, done that.  Thanks for cleaning up the bad stuff.  It gives us a chance to start over !
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Azarias on March 31, 2006, 08:03:47 PM
All new jewels! MMMMMM   ;D
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: nelly on March 31, 2006, 08:50:48 PM
That's ok!!  We all get to start over!! [smiley=2vrolijk_08.gif]
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Grand Duchess Kimbo on March 31, 2006, 09:14:27 PM
A fresh, clean slate for jewel lovers! Thankyou FA for removing the horrible spam. More jewels, please! ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on March 31, 2006, 10:13:15 PM
What was deleted? All the priors threads or just the last one?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on March 31, 2006, 10:15:36 PM
Never mind--I think I understand. I really need the modify/delete buttons.  :(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: B5218 on April 01, 2006, 07:54:30 AM
This modify/delete problem is puzzling since, in looking at my previous post, I see both buttons along with the quote button.  Yesterday, however, in looking at another of my posts I didn't. :o

But on to the subject at hand...Was this necklace ...

(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4/B5218/AlexandraCollar004.jpg)
(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4/B5218/AlexandraCollar003.jpg)

made from this piece?

(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4/B5218/AlexandraCollar002.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on April 01, 2006, 10:11:03 AM
Oy vey, that is an enduring mystery, along with the Loch Ness Monster and the Yeti...

I remember there was a spirited discussion on the RJOTWMB last year on this very question.  The outcome you ask?????  No definite conclusion.   :-/
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on April 01, 2006, 12:50:39 PM
I think the general consensus was no though. Didn't they say that wasn't even Queen Alexandra's necklace but a very similar one? I know Martyn and maybe Michael (who isn't here anymore) talked about this once on a prior Windsor Jewels thread.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on April 01, 2006, 02:45:12 PM
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/2a75954c.jpg)

Does anyone have another version of this picture? I have always found it odd, as in whether or not it is an actual photograph.
I only ask because I cannot identiify the brooch from this angle, my guesses are:
1. Surrey Brooch
2. Bottom section of Diamond Stomacher.

I also find it odd with the combination of quite victorian jewellry paired with the enormous St Edwards Crown. Is this the only picture there is of Her Majesty wearing this crown other then those of the actual coronation? I imagine it was taken around that time.
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/de964279.jpg)(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/41917b5e.jpg)
Does anyone else have guesses about the brooch?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on April 01, 2006, 02:55:23 PM
I was wondering, was not the Strathmore Rose Tiara lent out for an exhibition at the same time as the Delhi Durbar Tiara and therefore it is very unlikely that it have been broken up so recently?
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/c4148970.jpg)
I read somewhere that the silver has deteriorated and therefore would have to be re-set before it could be worn, which could explain why we havent seen it in years. Am i right in thinking that it hasnt been seen since the the Duchess of York wore it in the 1920's and 1930's?

(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/PrincessMargaret-ScrollTiara.jpg)(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/PrincessMargaret-PapyrusMotifTiaraa.jpg)

I only ask this because I have been wondering whether Princess Magaret ever owned these tiaras or was merely loaned then by her mother and sister. Because it seems that after he marriage when she aquired the Poltimore Tiara she rarely wore any others. Save for the Turqoise Parure which she was given as a wedding present. Is it possible to tell which gifts were merely for life, like those of Princess Diana?

(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/Jewels-PoltimoreTiara.jpg)(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/PrincessMargaret-TurquoiseParure.jpg)

Only because i would hate to see pieces such as the Papyrus Motif Tiara, Teck Circle Necklace/Tiara and Turquoise Parure to have disappeared from royal hands.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on April 01, 2006, 03:36:41 PM
When the items are revealed that are going to be auctioned, I'm hope the Teck jewelry isn't among the items.  :(

The Poltimore isn't as 'royal' and, being the largest (and most valuable?) item, could fetch a good price and maybe spare other jewelry needing to be sold. It's not really the type of tiara I could see Serena or Sarah wearing--too old-fashioned and ornate for their status--it seems like something a jeweler or museum might want.

The Queen Mother's tiara's are relatively small and, if they were Margaret's and might be sold, maybe Charles could buy them.  :) They would give Camilla something smaller than the DD tiara plus have a connection to the Queen Mother.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on April 01, 2006, 03:53:41 PM
I think the Turqoise Parure might well look good on Camilla, i think she suits quite substantial tiaras, and it would be interestine to see if she suits coloured stones, and entire parure, because at the moment she merely wears her own jewels save for tiaras.

It is a shame that the Queen Mother sold Queen Mary's Amethyst Parure, because that i think was about the right size for Camilla and had that connection with the Queen Mother.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on April 01, 2006, 11:02:16 PM
I tend to prefer the Gloucester turquoise parure because of the connection to Queen Mary--they had been wedding gifts from her parents. That would be nice to keep in the family but the Gloucesters probably wouldn't have reason to sell any time soon.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: just_i on April 03, 2006, 05:07:33 AM
Would anyone be so kind as to direct me to pictures of the Queen Mary Amethyst Parure and the amethyst  jewels currently in the royal collection.

Thanks in advance
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on April 03, 2006, 09:02:26 AM
Quote
Does anyone else have guesses about the brooch?

There are other pics of HM wearing these jewels (but not the crown) and it is definitely the bottom section of the stomacher.  This photo does look rather odd somehow, the crown doesn't look right to me for some reason.


just_i, this is for you.  This is the Queen Mary parure, sold by Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother, formerly the Duchess of York, née Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon.  I think I had posted this in the dearly departed orignal part 4.
I am sure someone will be able to dig up a photo of the Kent amethysts.  the only pic I can think of HM wearing them is in a mauvey-lilac dress with I think a Portuguese order.   :-/

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/ParureamthysteQueenMary.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eddie_uk on April 03, 2006, 09:28:31 AM
Emeraldeyes, dear, I think that if anyone does not know by now that the late Queen Mother was formerly the Duchess of York, née Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, I would point them in the direction of the thread relating to her. Everyone should at least know that.

Though it is so good of you to take the trouble of spelling it out so often!  :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on April 03, 2006, 10:53:43 AM
The Kent parure (or is it a demi-parure...?)

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/kentamethysts.jpg)

HM doesn't seem to like them very much, even the brooches don't get an airing very often.  I would like to see the Queen loan these out to the Duchess of Cornwall.  

eddieboy, I will meet you in the middle with 'Queen Mum' if that's acceptable!  :)


Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eddie_uk on April 03, 2006, 12:11:08 PM
Quote
The Kent parure (or is it a demi-parure...?)



eddieboy, I will meet you in the middle with 'Queen Mum' if that's acceptable!  :)



lol, of course hun :)

The Queen looks nice in the kent parure but the set is not exactly elegant IMO and quite chunky. Shame there is no matching tiara!
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on April 03, 2006, 12:20:06 PM
Although there isnt a matching Tiara, there are matching head combs. Her Magesty is said to like these pieces, I think she probably likes the history behind them, what with them being some of the oldest in the collection.
If i remember she actually had the dress specially designed to wear with these jewels.

I cannot think of any other pieces of amethyst jewellry, apart from pieces that belonged to Queen Alexandra and were either altered by queen mary or found their way out of the family.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eddie_uk on April 03, 2006, 12:29:08 PM
Quote
Although there isnt a matching Tiara, there are matching head combs. Her Magesty is said to like these pieces, I think she probably likes the history behind them, what with them being some of the oldest in the collection.

Interesting thank you boffer, are there any photos of the head combs? did Queen Victoria wear it much? Don't think I have seen Queen Mary in it?

 :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on April 03, 2006, 12:53:57 PM
Very interesting boffer, I didn't know there were combs as well, and there are three brooches in total, so it's quite a large suite.

Here's a second pic from further away but slightly more front-facing.

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/port2.jpg)

The necklace in particular does seem rather heavy, but I'm loving the earrings.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on April 03, 2006, 03:28:20 PM
(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/kentbrooch.jpg)

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/kentmaybe.jpg)

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/kentmaybe2.jpg)

I think the brooch in pics 1 and 2 are the same.

In pic 3 I think it's the one worn with the gown in the above posts.  
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: just_i on April 03, 2006, 06:40:26 PM
Most thanks for the wonderful pictures. :)
And whilst I like the Kent Suite, Queen Mary's parure is stunning, such a shame it was sold :(

Quote

I think the brooch in pics 1 and 2 are the same.

In pic 3 I think it's the one worn with the gown in the above posts.  

I am confused by these pictures you posted though, whist 1 and 2 look to be the same brooch and the brooch in 3 is different 2 and 3 appear to be the same event. Or does HM wear the exact same outfit with the exact same jewelry often? I haven't often taken the time to look at her entire outfit previously, as I tend to be rather distracted by the large shinny things...
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on April 03, 2006, 07:10:06 PM
The Duchess of Kent wearing the Kent parure

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/File0584kentamparure.jpg)

Leslie Field states that 'the Quee owns another amethyst necklace in addition to the Kent demi-parure, but appears to have no special affection for the stone, as she has worn the Kent suite only twice in public and the second necklace never. The necklace was a wedding gift from Queen Alexandra to Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother in 1923 and was given to the Queen after her marriage. Shortened and redesigned since 1923, the necklace now consists of three rows of small pearls interspersed with eight large oval amethysts, each surrounded by brilliant-cut diamonds. Hanging from the front largest cluster is a heart-shaped amethyst pendant surrounded by brilliants, and from the four side clusters hang oval amethyst drops surrounded by brilliants.'

'The Queen's other amethysts are set in a brooch presented to her in October 1960 when she opened the Queen's Bridge at Perth in Scotland. The brooch is a miniature flower bouquet with seven amethysts buds surrounded by white and yellow gold ferns and grasses, with a central group of twelve freshwater mauve-tinted pearsls from the River Tay.'
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on April 03, 2006, 07:15:40 PM
Queen Mary wearing the amethyst parure that was later sold. I think it's the only image of her wearing it and we wind up posting it on almost every jewel thread.  :)

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/QueenMaryprincessTeck1.jpg)

closer view:
(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/25_-_reina_mary_del_reino_unido_nac.jpg)

necklace & brooch

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/Collierbague1.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on April 03, 2006, 09:04:46 PM
Quote
I am confused by these pictures you posted though, whist 1 and 2 look to be the same brooch and the brooch in 3 is different 2 and 3 appear to be the same event. Or does HM wear the exact same outfit with the exact same jewelry often? I haven't often taken the time to look at her entire outfit previously, as I tend to be rather distracted by the large shinny things...

So funny that you write that, because I had to look twice myself.  I think they are two different events, same outfit worn to both with slightly different jewels.  Either that or we finally know what HM keeps in that black handbag...a change of brooches!!  :o
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on April 03, 2006, 09:07:20 PM
Quote
Queen Mary wearing the amethyst parure that was later sold. I think it's the only image of her wearing it and we wind up posting it on almost every jewel thread.  :)


It's an oldie but a goody.  I think there are a few of those "Hey look at me, I'm on every thread" pics around.  
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: B5218 on April 03, 2006, 09:19:04 PM
(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4/B5218/amethyst-4.jpg)

 :D
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on April 03, 2006, 10:48:51 PM
I forgot about that one! Probably because it isn't on all the threads.  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Rain on April 05, 2006, 07:18:19 AM
Does anyone know who Queen Mary's parure was sold to, a private individual or an organisation?  I'm just wondering if we will ever get to see those magnificent jewels again.
Title: Re: Windsor  Jewels part 4   boffers pos
Post by: joye on April 06, 2006, 12:57:57 AM
Regarding the picture of QEII wearing St. Edwards Crown and Chandelier  earrings, which were a wedding gift, 1947, from her parents. King George VI and Queen Mum.

The picture appears on page 82, the last edition of Majesty Magazine.

The original, I would say, came from  Picture Post magazine, Vol 59, No. 11  13th June 1953, cost  1/- , that is one shilling , copy of which I have in front of me .

Signed   HRH
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: B5218 on April 07, 2006, 08:27:50 PM
(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4/B5218/EnglandElizabeth0012.jpg)

I have pictures of the circle necklace worn by Pss Margaret but no good pictures of the piece as a tiara by anyone.  Does anyone have anything clearer?  If I zoom this picture, the detail is lost.

Thanks

Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: B5218 on April 09, 2006, 08:35:52 AM
It is official - the the Poltimore tiara is up for auction.  The starting price is $350,000

Let's see, how many people on this board are there? How much would each of us have to come up with? If we buy it, can I wear it on my birthday next year?

Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: TampaBay on April 09, 2006, 07:09:17 PM
Quote
Oy vey, that is an enduring mystery, along with the Loch Ness Monster and the Yeti...

I remember there was a spirited discussion on the RJOTWMB last year on this very question.  The outcome you ask?????  No definite conclusion.   :-/


My theory is that the above "Alexandra" necklace is paste.  Alexandra loved mixing paste with the real "dudes".  Old Iron and Emerald Drawers never wore paste nor did the Queen mum nor does QEII.  This is my theory why this necklace has not seen the light of day in 100 years?

TampaBay

Footnote:  Lady Diana never had a problem with paste or Rhinestones if she like the design of a jewelry piece.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eddie_uk on April 10, 2006, 10:25:13 AM
Today in the Daily Mail newsapaper they had a front page photo of Princess Margaret on her wedding day and why her son was selling her jewels. Obviously for inheritance tax reasons (disgraceful if you ask me!!) Anyway they had some lovely pictures of what was going to Christies auction in June, around 200 lots apparently!! I bet they will fetch good prices, just like the Duke of Gloucesters things did, but especially as they are jewels.  
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: royal_netherlands on April 10, 2006, 10:56:36 AM
Too bad thier selling so many things, for tacs reasons also disgraceful if you ask me too.
I wouldnt sell things that have belonged to my mother or her mother or granmother.
But I dont know the details and Im a family history freak so I wouldnt sell anything that belonged to my family. ;)

  royal netherlands
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on April 10, 2006, 05:21:06 PM
I think it's a shame death or inheritance taxes are so high but I don't have a problem with them selling items--unless they are full of royal heritage like the Teck items. They really don't need the Poltimore--where would they wear it? Sarah is basically a private citizen now and not the type to wear a huge tiara whereas Serena is a Viscountess but still wouldn't have need of such an enormous one. I'd rather see the Poltimore go and them be able to keep more items. They might also want to get rid of some items and make some money, not meaning to sound harsh. Caroline Kennedy and JFK Jr held 2 auctions of Jackie's items (and some of their father's) years ago and made millions. They have families to take care of and, if you're not attached to the items why keep them? Even the Kennedy museum didn't need them.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: royal_netherlands on April 11, 2006, 09:01:23 AM
Quote
I think it's a shame death or inheritance taxes are so high but I don't have a problem with them selling items--unless they are full of royal heritage like the Teck items. They really don't need the Poltimore--where would they wear it? Sarah is basically a private citizen now and not the type to wear a huge tiara whereas Serena is a Viscountess but still wouldn't have need of such an enormous one. I'd rather see the Poltimore go and them be able to keep more items. They might also want to get rid of some items and make some money, not meaning to sound harsh. Caroline Kennedy and JFK Jr held 2 auctions of Jackie's items (and some of their father's) years ago and made millions. They have families to take care of and, if you're not attached to the items why keep them? Even the Kennedy museum didn't need them.

Yes youre right about the poltimore, but thier also selling things from her childhood and some beatifull jewels she got from her grandmother Queen Mary.(Like Queen Mary's antique diamond rivere)

I would rather sell some big things like the Polimore tiara and keep the smaller things,just like you said too gdella.
But maybe youre right why keep them if youre not attached to them, but I cant stand it why sell small things that were part of youre mothers life and youre family history.Oooh I think I will stop now the family history freak attack is coming back. ;) ;D

   royal netherlands
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on April 13, 2006, 01:27:18 PM
Getting away from the sale of princess margarets jewels and Prince harry's passing out parade, I saw a picture of todays Maundy Service and i cannot place the brooch HM was wearing, it is similar to the William IV Brooch but also a larger versions of Queen Mary's Floret Earings (Fields Book).
Does anyone have any suggestions as to what it could be?
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/26259b06.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on April 13, 2006, 09:26:12 PM
I believe it is the King William IV Brooch. WIV took 6 large brilliants and a number of smaller stones from a diamond-studded Badge of the Order of the Bath that belonged to GIII and crafted the brooch in a circular frame around a center cluster. The statue of QV on the Embankment, which commemorates QV's Golden Jubilee, shows the brooch just under thecollet necklace. QV bequethed the brooch, one of the oldest pieces in the royal collection, to the Crown in 1901.

There's also this great close-up of the brooch, courtesy of GREMB

http://members3.boardhost.com/Oranjes/msg/1144976867.html
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on April 14, 2006, 03:23:45 PM
I was wondering, in this portrait is it actually Mary? And if so is she not wearing Alexandra's Tiara (Berties Gift)?
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/b8f905b0.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: B5218 on April 14, 2006, 07:52:24 PM
Good point.  

The face doesn't look like either woman.  Maybe it is a matter of artistic license. :-X  Perhaps someone has a clearer copy.

My copy was labeled "Mary" and is facing the other direction.
(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4/B5218/QueenMary.jpg)

But it looks like Alexandra's tiara
(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4/B5218/rundell2a.jpg)

Maybe a clue is the bracelets.  Did Mary wear bracelets in the manner?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on April 14, 2006, 09:15:22 PM
It's definitely supposed to be Mary. The image was produced for the Coronation and published in various magazines. You can tell by the features. She wears one of her familiar diamond chokers but some artistic license appears to have been taken with the tiara which does resemble Alexandra's. I don't think the picture was painted from life or a photo so a lot is probably the artist's interpretation.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4  re posts 42 & 43
Post by: joye on April 15, 2006, 12:37:07 AM
Re Boffers post no. 42.

It is indeed King William  IV brooch.  6 large diamonds surrounding a cluster centre.

 It is interesting to know that all 5 Queens have worn it, from Q. Vic to QEII.

Queen Victoria's marble  statue for her golden jubilee,  depicts this brooch just below the Crown collet necklace.  In 1901, Q. Vic left this brooch to the Crown.

Other Crown pieces of jewellery are
The Diamond Diadem
Regal Tiara
Diamond Collet Necklace
Diamond Fringe Tiara
Q. Anne/Q. Caroline pearl necklaces
Amethyst Suite, once owned by Duchess of Kent, Q. Vics mother
Bow brooches
Q. Vics sapphire brooch

ETC

Signed   HRH
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: B5218 on April 15, 2006, 06:48:41 PM
I am not good without COLOR !  What necklace is this?  Yes, sports fans, I see the emeralds in the tiara but I don't recognize the necklace.

(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4/B5218/whatisit.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on April 15, 2006, 09:29:56 PM
I believe it's Goldmen necklace (and QV's fringe earrings). They are emeralds--probably the only major necklace, apart from the Cambridge emeralds, that the Queen has.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on April 15, 2006, 09:30:57 PM
Correction--Godman necklace.  :-[
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on April 15, 2006, 09:33:14 PM
Speaking of the Vladimir tiara, I was looking through the lastest Royalty magazine (with Angelina Jolie on the cover  ::) ). It mentions a display, in commemoration of the Queen's 80th birthday, in which many outfits and jewels will be on display at Buckingham Palace this summer. The Vladimir tiara is among the items listed--along with the Cullinan V brooch and one of QM's bow brooches (I forget which), the aquamarine Cartier clips and the bracelet Philip designed for her. I would love to see the first 3 items in person! I'm so bummed.  :(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: B5218 on April 15, 2006, 09:50:17 PM
Talk about being bummed ! Harumph !   I was really bummed by paying all that money for Royalty Magazine and getting 8 pages of Angelina whoever she is.   >:(   I bought the magazine this afternoon without looking through it.  I got home, took off my shoes put my feet up and found Royalty??????? .... who is the person ?  I don't really want to know.   :P  So I treated myself as a consolation to surfing through Corbis the rest of the afternoon.  :)  Now I have so much new stuff in my files that I have to do a backup tomorrow.

PS - Thanks for the name of the necklace.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: B5218 on April 16, 2006, 09:50:56 AM
I am not an emerald person and don't know much past the Cambridge Brooches.

What are these 2 necklaces?  Is there a better photo of the first one?

(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4/B5218/emeralds11.jpg)
(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4/B5218/emeralds10.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: nelly on April 16, 2006, 10:15:47 AM
GDella is correct--that is the Godman necklace.  I believe QEII has had new matching earrings made for it, and these may be the ones in the first pic you have just posted B5218 but I don't recognize the necklace.  Now for the last pic posted--that set is new to me & maybe new to QEII also!!  She seems to have several new jewels these days.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on April 16, 2006, 10:23:50 AM
Perhaps the latter necklace is made with some of the Cambridge emeralds? The drops look similar and I don't think all of them were used. It gives HM a less ornate necklace to wear.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on April 16, 2006, 10:37:01 AM
This is the first emerald necklace, i believe the only time it has been worn in public was the Ladies in lavender film premier.
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/QueenElizabeth-LadiesinLavenderPrem.jpg)
The second was worn with the valdimir Tiara (with emerald drops) in place of the Ladies of India Necklace. In Canada.
I dont not think it was made with the cambridge emeralds because i believe the remaining emeralds were used as drops for the tiara, however it may be possible that they could well be emeralds that have been left over since Alexandra reset many of the Indian Gifts.
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/QueenElizabeth-ValdimirTiarawithcam.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on April 16, 2006, 10:41:49 AM
The earing which HM now pairs with the Godman necklace are clearly not any of the above (nor QV Fringe Earings. Therefore i think we came to the conclusion that HM has possibly had new earings commissioned to match this necklcae, since they seem to be replicas of the Necklaces drops.
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/Jewels-GodmanEmeraldNecklace.jpg)
As worn at the Entente Cordinal dinner at Windsor castle, 2004
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/QueenElizabeth-EntenteCordinalDinne.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on April 16, 2006, 10:51:09 AM
An even clearer view of the earings, that are teamed with the Godman necklace
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/67e000ec.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: B5218 on April 16, 2006, 11:39:22 AM
Thanks, Boffer, for the better picture of the unknown gold and emerald necklace.  What caught my eye was the gold, not something you see her wearing a lot.

I see you managed to get a same dress twice in your posting.    [smiley=thumbsup.gif]
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: nelly on April 16, 2006, 12:33:12 PM
B5218--thanks for the clearer pic of the gold & emerald necklace and earrings.  I see that the earrings are not the new ones matching the Godman necklace, but are a match for this new necklace.  It is unusual for QEII to wear jewelry that shows so much gold--I like both of these new sets of emerald jewelry.  Wait until emeraldeyes sees them ;) ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on April 17, 2006, 03:14:18 PM
oh yeah baby...that's what I'm talkin' about!!!!  

I'm feeling kind of faint.  Will post again later when I have regained my composure...
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on April 19, 2006, 05:37:27 AM
Would love to know more about the unknown gold and emerald necklace. Wonder the history behind it ?  :-?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: just_i on April 24, 2006, 07:14:01 AM
The Queen Mum's Quartet of Bracelets
http://www.mandysroyalty.org/Queenjewels3.html
Third picture down the page

I recall not long ago it was a topic of discussion of a message board (Royal Jewels of the World, I believe) but I was wondering if anyone could point me in the direction of more information and pictures of these beautiful bracelets, preferrably including when they were worn as a bandeau. Curious as to if it was the only time the bracelets were worn as such?

I personally think they are stunning and hope to see them on a princess in the not to near future, Beatrice and Eugine perhaps? After all there mother only has one tiara, if both are in attendance another would have to be provided for their use? ;)

Alas I'm sure just wishful thinking :( but still any pictures or info of this set would be most appreciated
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on April 24, 2006, 09:09:04 AM
AS far as I can recall, I have only seen one picture of the QEQM wearing the bracelets as a bandeau.  The whole family is in a box at the theatre and it's a relatively 'far-away' view.  The fitting to turn the bracelets into the bandeau were also Cartier-made, and were given by her husband some time after the final bracelet.
There's also a nice picture of QEQM wearing the bracelets along with several pearl necklaces.  I am pretty sure that these pics are all on a previous "Windsor Jewels" thread, either part 1 or 2.

modified to add:
Of course, I now realize that all previous Windsor Jewel threads are inaccessible...duh!  It's quite apparent that I should ingest copious amounts of caffeine before posting.   ::)
I will dig up these pics from my archives later unless someone beats me to it!  :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on April 24, 2006, 09:42:19 AM
Yes I am optimistic that these pieces will resurface again... :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on April 24, 2006, 10:00:20 PM
Three bracelets mounted as a bandeau.

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/QMsCartierBandeaubracelets.jpg)


QEQM wearing the bandeau.

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/QMBertieMay.jpg)

I'm still trying to unearth the pic of QEQM wearing the bracelets along with those pearl necklaces.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on April 24, 2006, 10:06:24 PM
Just found a colour pic of the bracelets and a pic of QEQM wearing them.

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/QMsCartierbracelets.jpg)

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/1-QnElizabethfromQueenMary1.jpg)

Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on April 24, 2006, 10:07:34 PM
Yes...it seems that the Queen Mum is quite like Diana in her hay day of using bracelets and necklaces as heard ornaments.  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on April 24, 2006, 10:09:52 PM
It seems like Queen Mum is wearing a pareau of turquises...was it the same set she gave to Margaret ?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on April 25, 2006, 01:10:12 PM
Yes it was either given as a birthday or wedding present (i have heard both suggestions and do not know what to believe)
It has not appeared as some of the jewels to be auctioned so it could well have returned to the queen, or it is just being held on to.

(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/Jewels-PersianTurquoiseTiara.jpg)(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/PrincessMargaret-TurquoiseParure.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on April 25, 2006, 09:16:34 PM
It may have gone back to the royal store. Thank God it was not to be auctioned. It could be a nice set for William or Harry's wife.  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: just_i on April 26, 2006, 07:19:54 AM
Quote
It may have gone back to the royal store. Thank God it was not to be auctioned. It could be a nice set for William or Harry's wife.  ;)
Wouldn't it just? Perhaps along with the teck cricle necklace and the Queen Mum's braclets?  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on April 26, 2006, 08:50:28 AM

If in fact the parure has gone back into the royal vaults, I would like to see Camilla given a shot at that tiara.  Knowing her existing fondness for turquoise, this set might be just the ticket.  It would provide her with the grand necklace I think we all agree she needs, as well as a brooch for securing the ribbon of any order she may receive.  The tiara is grand but not in the overpowering way of the Durbar or the Honeycomb.  
I coud definitely see William's wife getting a 'permanent loan' of the Teck circle, which I absolutely adore.  

Just as an aside, does anyone else think it rather odd that QEQM would pair the turquoise parure with the Cartier bracelets?  I think it would be an incongruous look.  Just my opinion though!  :-/
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on April 26, 2006, 11:56:43 AM
You are right. If Camilla is smart, she will go for that set. It would suit her as well as a younger princess who likes to tan... ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on April 27, 2006, 11:47:22 AM
Being rather imperialistic, and missing the days of empire and so on, i prefere to refere to her as Her Late Majesty Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother; although of course that is such a long thing to type that i tend to use the old affectionate referal we have here in england as the Queen Mother (or Queen Mum).

The Queen Mother did have a in her early days (when she did not that much of a selection to choose from) a tendency to mix all sorts of items together.
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/QueenMother-StrathmoreTiaraCartierB.jpg)
Like this sitting where she wears a diamond and pearl tiara, turquoise brooch and her cartier braclets (which were many different colours) must have been a rather bizzare sight. i wonder what colour dress she wore to try and tie all the colours together.
I also have noticed that she has attached her turquoise earings to her pearl necklaces, an interesting idea. Does anyone have a colour copy of this photo?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on April 27, 2006, 02:17:20 PM
Beautifully worn here by Serena on her wedding day...

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/serena.jpg)


(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/serena2.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on April 27, 2006, 04:30:27 PM
Quote
I love that tiara ! Perfect for a young princess ! Light and attractive too.  ;D

It's the perfect tiara for a lovely young lady (and future Countess) such as Serena. Glad to see that it has escaped the auction block.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on April 27, 2006, 04:38:48 PM
I had posted this in the Imperial Family thread but since we often discuss the Romanov jewels bought by the Windsors, I thought I would put it here as well.

List of MF's jewelry (sold upon her death by Hennels). Those bought by Queen Mary, Pss Mary (or her husband) are in bold
 
1. 8 diamond flowers on white silk band (GBP 1200-1500) not sold
2. 8 diamond ornaments on black silk (GBP 240-350) not sold
3. sm diamond hair decoration (GBP 250-300) not sold
4. diamond banlge (GBP 700-850) withdrawn upon Xenia's request
5. diamond & ruby bangle (GBP 250-300) unsold & returned to Xenia
6. necklace w/144 small pearls (GBP 1200-1600) sold to Ld Lascelles GBP 1615
7. pearl & diamond choker w/sapphire & diamond clasp (5678-6000) sold to QM 6000
8. single-strand pearl necklace (GBP 1400-1800) unsold & return to Xenia
9. single strand pearl necklaces: 45 pearls & diamond clasp; 55 pearls; 49 pearls; 60 pearls; 66 pearls (GBP 48,000) sold for GBP 47,500
10. 33 pearl & diamond bezels, diamond clasp & strand of 32 pearls w/diamond clasp (GBP 40,000-50,000) sold for GBP 64,000
11. diamond star of the order of St Andrew (GBP 500-550) sold for GBP 474
12. diamond & pearl necklace on vlevet (GBP 20-30) unsold & returned to Xenia
13. yellow diamond hairpin (GBP 250-300) sold (no price listed)
14. white diamond hairpin (GBP 1800-2400) sold; no price listed
15. 3 hat pins w/single diamond (GBP 280-330) sold; no price listed
16. diamond feather-shaped hatpin (GBP 50-55) sold; no price listed
17. diamond & pear-shaped pearl hatpin (GBP 100-120) unsold
18. 4 tortoise-shell & diamond hairpins (GBP 3-4) left w/GDss Xenia
19. 10 hat pins w/stones (GBP 140) left w/Xenia
20. gold, diamond & spinel cross (GBP 180-250) sold; no price listed
21. ruby & diamond cross (16 sm rubies) (GBP 49) left w/Xenia
22. sapphire & diamond cross (GBP 120-130) left w/Xenia
23. diamond cross w/Savoir's head (GBP 325) left w/Xenia
24. black enamel, diamond & pearl cross (GBP 30) sold; no price listed
25. enamel cross w/pearls, rubies & diamonds (GBP 35-40) unsold; returned to Xenia
26. round pendant w/garnets & brilliants (GBP 10) left w/Xenia
27. diamond, sapphire & garnet pendant on platinum chain (GBP 10) sold to Pss Mary 6/28/29 GBP 10
28. eagle pendant w/diamonds in a gold & silver setting (GBP 15) left w/Xenia
29. diamond, pearl, ruby & sapphire bracelet (GBP 200) left w/Xenia
30. diamond bracelet w/cabochon sapphire (GBP 250) sold 7/2/29 GBP 199.10
31. gold chain bracelet w/1 turquoise & 1 diamond ((GBP 80) returned to Xenia
32. gold chain set w/rubies, diamonds & Easter eggs in gold & precious stones (GBP 350) left with Xenia
33. chain set w/cabochon sapphires & moonstones (GBP 25) left w/Xenia
34. turquoise & diamond chain (GBP 15) left with Xenia
35. mat gold chain w/9 pear-shaped pearls (GBP 10) left w/Xenia
36. small sapphire chain (GBP 10) left w/Xenia
37. pearl & diamond pendant w/a miniature & 3 pear-shaped pearls (GBP 1000-1200) sold 2/12/32 for GBP 760
38. heart-shaped diamond brooch w/crown motif (GBP 1200-1250) sold 6/26/29 GBP 1140
39. ruby & diamond brooch w/2 miniatures (GBP 175-200) sold 7/2/29 for GBP 180.10
40. diamond brooch w/2 round pearls & 1 pear-shaped pearl (GBP 7000; later revised to GBP 3500-5000) returned to Xenia 6/22/34
41. diamond & turquoise pendant (GBP 600-700) returned to Xenia
42. brooch w/oval cabochon sapphire surrounded by diamonds & pear-shaped pearl (GBP 1400-1900) sold to QM 10/3/30 GBP 2375
43. crown-shaped brooch set w/sapphires & diamonds (GBP 400-500) sold 3/28/30 GBP 474
44. large oval brooch w/sapphire surrounded by diamonds (GBP 2500-3000) sold 7/4/29 no price listed
45. lg brooch w/cabochon sapphire & 4 diamonds (GBP 2000-3000) sold /14/29 GBP 2850
46. brooch w/cabochon sapphire & diamonds (GBP 1550) sold GBP 1425  
47. brooch w/large round pearl surrounded by diamond rope (GBP 550-600) sold to QM 6/12/29 GBP 555
48. diamond brooch set w/1 large diamond & 1 large pearl (GBP 1150-1700) sold 3/28/30 GBP 1187
49. pearl & diamond brooch (GBP 200-250) sold 9/28/30 GBP 142.10
50. round brooch w/pearl & diamond central motif (GBP 22) left w/Xenia
51. diamond bow w/hanging pear-shaped pearl (GBP 120) returned to Xenia 7/18/29
52. saber-shaped diamond brooch w/3 pearls (GBP 130-180) sold 9/30/30 GBP 85.10
53. diamond-studded clover w/baroque pearls (GBP 75) returned to Xenia
54. brooch set w/cabochon emerald, rubies & diamonds (GBP 2000-25000) sold 6/26/29 GBP 2137
 
The remaining 22 items on the list are for jewelry w/a value of less than GBP 100, mostly brooches. 18 of these pieces (est. GBP 1389) were left w/Xenia. The remaining 4 were sold for a total of GBP 141.27.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on April 27, 2006, 09:07:03 PM
Also according to the Orlean-Borbon family, Baby Bee's diamond fringe tiara (the one which she inherited from her mother, Marie Alexandrovna, Dowager Duchess of Coburg) was also sold to the British Royal family to fund one of her charities in Spain. The only diamond fringe I know that appeared around that period was the one worn by Princess Mary, Countess of Harewood. The other one was owned by Princess Marina, Duchess of Kent. Don't know which one came from Bee ?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on April 27, 2006, 09:28:45 PM
Neither wedding issue mentions Baby Bee. Marina's tiara was a gift from the City of London. Geoffrey Munn's book mentions that Mary's tiara was 'one of two Russian fringe tiaras in her collection. The Princess had a spectacular arra of jewellery that came down to her as wedding presents and by inheritance.' It doesn't note where either one came from. It doesn't seem that either was a wedding gift--at least based on the wedding issues. Mary had been given QV's sapphire tiara from her parents and also received an emerald one.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on April 27, 2006, 09:54:37 PM
I did not know that Princess Mary had 2 Russian Fringe tiaras. I guess one of them may have been bought from Baby Bee. Her tiara came from her mother the Duchess of Coburg, who was a Russian Grand Duchess. That tiara was not a wedding present but one bought by either Queen Mary or the British Royal Family for its collection.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on April 27, 2006, 09:57:11 PM
Is this the tiara of Marie Coburg's?

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/coburgfringetiarabw.jpg)
(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/coburgfringetiaraw.jpg)

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/coburgtiarafringew.jpg)

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/File1377duchessofcoburgtiaraw.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on April 27, 2006, 09:59:49 PM
Princess Mary & her diamond fringe tiara

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/Princess20Mary20fringea.jpg)

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/Princess_Mary_Visc_Lascelles1.jpg)

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/pmaryseatedGeorgeIIIDiamondFringeti.jpg)

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/jewelsdiamond1.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on April 27, 2006, 10:19:27 PM
Yes ! That was the tiara. Baby Bee only wore the tiara twice (that I know of) one of those was the coronation of her sister Queen Marie of Romania. There is a photo of her standing with this tiara with her sister and nieces (all in tiaras)... :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on April 28, 2006, 01:12:31 PM
Does anyone know the history (origin) behind the tiara which Mary wore for the coronation of both her brother George VI and niece Elizabeth II?
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/Jewels-PrincessMarysTiara.jpg)
I notice she also used to set her large sapphire brooch in the centre, and wore it with her sapphire suite in place of QV's tiara. Was this brooch given with her apphire parure?
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/PrincessMary-PrincessRoyal.jpg)(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/PrincessMary-ViscountessLascelles.jpg)
Where is it now? Has it been broken up, sold or simply sat in the Harewoods (or Windsor's) safe?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on April 28, 2006, 03:29:23 PM
I think the diadem may have been sold... :(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: B5218 on April 28, 2006, 04:35:51 PM
This question may have been answered before on a thread that won't open.

I noted this as the King Khalid necklace.  Am I correct?  I can't find a picture of just the necklace alone or from an angle where you can be sure of what you are looking at.

(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4/B5218/untitled2.jpg)

What is this necklace?  The very clear definition picture is from Tamara (I think) at the GREMB from the recent visit to Singapore.

(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4/B5218/untitled.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on April 29, 2006, 05:09:05 AM
Hmmmmm....?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: B5218 on May 03, 2006, 04:15:57 PM
Regarding the Honeycomb tiara which was worn by the Queen Mother, is the only photograph of the Duchess of Cornwall wearing it the photo taken in the rain through the car window?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on May 03, 2006, 04:19:29 PM
It's the only I've seen, unfortunately.   :(    I would love to see a better view myself.

Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on May 03, 2006, 09:00:39 PM
Me too... :(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on May 07, 2006, 03:44:35 PM
I was just wondering that since HM Queen Elizabeth, The Queen Mothers crown on the display in HM Tower of London has a cyrstal replica in place of the Lahore Diamond (pendant of QV's Crown Collet Necklace) which was orginally set in the cross above the monde for George VI and Her Coronation, was the diamond reset for HM funeral or was the crystal left in place?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on May 09, 2006, 08:26:54 PM
Good question !
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: B5218 on May 09, 2006, 08:57:45 PM
This was worn the the Duchess of Cornwall at her daughters wedding.  I think she has worn it before.  Was this part of the Queen Mother's collection?

(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4/B5218/brooch01.gif)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on May 10, 2006, 08:55:25 AM
Yes I think it was a part of QEQM's collection.  I recall reading somewhere (probably RJOTWMB or GREMB) that it is a Fabergé piece that was presented during a Russian visit.  That's all I can remember at the moment.  The Duchess of Cornwall has worn it at least once before, fairly recently IIRC.  I think I may have a clearer picture somewhere.  Will post later if I dig it up.   :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on May 12, 2006, 11:35:47 AM
From Getty.

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/lily.jpg)

Worn in Cairo on the recent tour.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on May 13, 2006, 04:08:55 AM
It looks like Faberge to me ! Guess Camilla (via Charles) recieved quite a share in the Queen Mum's "private" jewels...I should think she could also have recieved Mrs. Ronnie Greville's jewels since they belong to Cookie too !
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on May 13, 2006, 10:11:19 AM
I think the Duchess (through Charles) probably did end up with most of the Cookie jar's contents.  It's a good thing Camilla seems to enjoy wearing brooches.  I seem to recall that there was a much better close up pic of that brooch posted somewhere, but I don't have it  :(

I would really like to see her try to wear that five-row Godzilla diamond necklace of Mrs. Greville's.   :o  
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on May 13, 2006, 04:00:03 PM
According to Hugo Vicker's book, the five row necklace was reduce to three for Cookie to wear, since I guess it would be too heavy for an 100 year old dowager to wear. I think the three row version is more elegant. Don't you think ?  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on May 13, 2006, 11:16:52 PM
Quote
the Cookie jar's contents.   

 ;D This about made me spit out my soda laughing.

I think you're right and that we will see more & more pieces emerge on Camilla. I wonder if Cookie left the items to Charles, not just as her favorite grandchild, but with the understanding they would probably be worn by Camilla. After all, Camilla's engagement ring was one of hers.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on May 14, 2006, 02:47:26 AM
I think it was also part of the Greville collection... ::)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on May 14, 2006, 10:30:43 AM
The ring was also from there?  Wow Mrs. Greville had quite a few trinkets didn't she?  

I'm not sure if I like the three-row better than the five-row - I don't think I've seen a pic of the five-row actually being worn- just this still life pic with it and the ruby brooch.  It would be frighfully heavy though, you're right on that count.  It does look to me like the necklaces were made so that the wearer could separate it to two pieces it they so desired, so it's my hope that the two-row part is kicking around somewhere, just waiting to be joined to its mate.

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/Kopie20van20necklace5row.jpg)(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/Kopie20220van20diamond3.jpg)

Anyone have a pic of Cookie wearing that brooch?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on May 14, 2006, 11:33:11 AM
There rather blurred picture on this site.

http://www.royal-magazin.de/qmum.htm
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on May 14, 2006, 12:03:20 PM
I think Hugo Vickers had one pic from his book. But I agreed that was still blurry...Yes...I do wonder about the other deteched necklaces... ::)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on May 14, 2006, 12:10:13 PM
Indeed ! Ronnie Greville had quite an impressive collection of jewels. When Queen Ena of Spain (another of Mrs. Greville's friends) recieved only money but no jewels from her friends's will, she was quite disapointed. Also when Cookie recieved the inheritance, there was quite a few raised eyebrows of her reciving such a fortune. But since it was will to her personally and not the crown, she was free to leave it to whatever she liked (without having to give it back to the royal collection like her other jewels). Prince Charles was her favourite grandson, and future heir to the throne. It was natural fot her to leave him the collection. I also think some pices may also go to Prince William and Harry when the time comes for them to marry.  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eddie_uk on May 14, 2006, 03:09:49 PM
Quote
Indeed ! Ronnie Greville had quite an impressive collection of jewels. When Queen Ena of Spain (another of Mrs. Greville's friends) recieved only money but no jewels from her friends's will, she was quite disapointed. Also when Cookie recieved the inheritance, there was quite a few raised eyebrows of her reciving such a fortune.

Yes that's just petty, that was Mrs Grevilles wish so of course it should be honoured and she considered the Queen Mother a good friend. Plus she needed the jewels as Queen Mary had the best bits!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on May 14, 2006, 06:14:57 PM
Actaully, how much did QM have by then?

She had given the Crown property--such as the Delhi Durbar tiara and Cullinans--back to the Crown upon her widowhood and had given many large gifts of jewelry to her daughters-in-law upon their marriages as well as several pieces to EII upon her marriage.

By EII's wedding in 1947, she would no longer have been in possession of such pieces as:

Delhi Durbar
Girls of Great Britain & Ireland tiara
Iveagh Tiara
Teck Turqoise Tiara (given to Dss Gloucester)
Cambridge sapphires

I guess she had the Vladimir tiara and Cambridge emeralds set, as well as miscellaneous pieces of jewelry--which were left to EII. Not to say that QM didn't have some goodies but that she wasn't quite the 'Cartier's Counter' of her heyday.  :) Cookie, would've had many of the 'best bits' since some were Crown property--she just didn't seem to care much for many of the pieces such as the DD.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: B5218 on May 14, 2006, 09:34:31 PM
One of the pieces belonging to the Crown was the piece known as the State Diadem or, as listed currently the Monarchy web site, the 1820 Diamond Diadem

http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/eGallery/object.asp?searchText=&title=diadem&rccode=&makerName=&category=&collector=&theme=&startYear=&endYear=&object=31702&row=0.
Queen Elizabeth II wore it to the state opening of Parliament in 1952.  There are photographs of it being worn by Queens Victoria, Alexandra, and Mary.  

As a piece belonging to the Crown, it would have been available to Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother during the reign of her husband King George VI.   Is there any photographic evidence that she every wore it?

Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on May 14, 2006, 09:59:43 PM
Indeed...Cookie had the misfortune to be sandwitched between two Queens. She recieved some jewels when she was Duchess of York, and more when she became Queen. However Queen Mary kept the best bits and willed them to her granddaughter when she died. However since George VI died before his mother, Cookie had to sent the queen consort pieces back to the crown and left with her own as Duchess of York (however some of that had gone to Princess Margaret). After QEII became queen, her mother got a share of the royal jewels. So in effect the Greville collection came in time for Cookie to fill in her jar again. New tiara like the Cartier (hexagon design so many hated) one also came as her own jewels (specially created for her).
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Morecambrian on May 16, 2006, 02:35:12 AM
Quote
Indeed...Cookie had the misfortune to be sandwitched between two Queens. She recieved some jewels when she was Duchess of York, and more when she became Queen. However Queen Mary kept the best bits and willed them to her granddaughter when she died. However since George VI died before his mother, Cookie had to sent the queen consort pieces back to the crown and left with her own as Duchess of York (however some of that had gone to Princess Margaret). After QEII became queen, her mother got a share of the royal jewels. So in effect the Greville collection came in time for Cookie to fill in her jar again. New tiara like the Cartier (hexagon design so many hated) one also came as her own jewels (specially created for her).
The tiara was not created by Cartier, it was made in 1921 by BOUCHERON for Mrs Greville (from dismantled jewels including an earlier tiara ).In 1953 it had slight modifications (addition of 5 stones,along the top by made by Cartier)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Morecambrian on May 16, 2006, 02:44:47 AM
Quote
Actaully, how much did QM have by then?

She had given the Crown property--such as the Delhi Durbar tiara and Cullinans--back to the Crown upon her widowhood and had given many large gifts of jewelry to her daughters-in-law upon their marriages as well as several pieces to EII upon her marriage.

By EII's wedding in 1947, she would no longer have been in possession of such pieces as:

Delhi Durbar
Girls of Great Britain & Ireland tiara
Iveagh Tiara
Teck Turqoise Tiara (given to Dss Gloucester)
Cambridge sapphires

I guess she had the Vladimir tiara and Cambridge emeralds set, as well as miscellaneous pieces of jewelry--which were left to EII. Not to say that QM didn't have some goodies but that she wasn't quite the 'Cartier's Counter' of her heyday.  :) Cookie, would've had many of the 'best bits' since some were Crown property--she just didn't seem to care much for many of the pieces such as the DD.
You can be sure that the old Queens casket was still bulging up till her death despite the lavish gifts.Apart from all the lesser cullinans,the Cambridge emeralds,the Dowager Empresses sapphire brooch and pearl collar,the 7 or 8 diamond riveres there was at least 8 tiaras....(the Cambridge lovers knot,the Vladimir and Queen Alexandra's fringe all passed to the current Queen,The Queen mother inherited  a small sapphire one).There was also countless brooches etc.The old Queen despite her generosity to her progeny ( she had given princess Margaret a small diadem in 1948)still had plenty of bling....................
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Morecambrian on May 16, 2006, 07:08:01 AM
Yesterday while in London was able to visit the breathtaking exhibition held at Wartski (just off Bond Street) in aid of Charity.Some illustrious people have lent Faberge and other gems of Russian origin. The display included the emerald diadem owned by Grand Duchess Marie Pavlovna the Younger and later sold to the Yugoslav Royal family, a pendant owned by Marie Feodorevna ,Easter egg cufflinks she gave her son Nicholas II, a fabled aquamarine brooch Nicholas bought from Faberge for Alexandra and other gems from the caskets of Grand Duchesses Vladimir & Serge among many others. It was a fascinating insight into there world. It runs till May 20th.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on May 16, 2006, 08:47:50 AM
How timely of you to post this info Morecambiran...I was just reading my new Majesty mag last evening and there were a few pages on this exhibition.  I was hoping that someone in our midst would visit and post pics from the catalogue.  
The article mentioned that some of the Marchioness of Londonderry's fabled amethysts would be on display, as well as a large pink topaz, all of which were presents from an admiring czar.  
Do you recall how big that aquamarine and diamond brooch was?  There is a good picture in my magazine, but it's hard to tell the size of something when there is nothing for a reference point.

modified to add:  Welcome Morecambrian!  I hope you enjoy your time here on the forum, lovely to have another jewel-nut with us!
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on May 16, 2006, 09:51:05 AM
I saw that too...really lovely.  ;) I love arquamarines too...
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on May 16, 2006, 10:06:36 AM
You saw the exhibition or the magazine? :-?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on May 16, 2006, 10:21:06 AM
Alas...only the magazine.  :( But looking forward in getting the catalogue.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Morecambrian on May 16, 2006, 12:39:42 PM
Quote
How timely of you to post this info Morecambiran...I was just reading my new Majesty mag last evening and there were a few pages on this exhibition.  I was hoping that someone in our midst would visit and post pics from the catalogue.  
The article mentioned that some of the Marchioness of Londonderry's fabled amethysts would be on display, as well as a large pink topaz, all of which were presents from an admiring czar.  
Do you recall how big that aquamarine and diamond brooch was?  There is a good picture in my magazine, but it's hard to tell the size of something when there is nothing for a reference point.

modified to add:  Welcome Morecambrian!  I hope you enjoy your time here on the forum, lovely to have another jewel-nut with us!
Thanks for the welcome,but I am not really new I used to be Lancashireladandre but due to difficulties had to reregister....The aquamarine itself was the size of a matchbox and of a wonderful shade of blue.The frame was of intertwined diamond zigzags.It was bought by Nicholas on August 10th 1894 for 1,100 roubles.At the same time he purchased a pink pearl necklace with a diamond clasp for 177,600 roubles!!!!!! truely a princely gift.....
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on May 16, 2006, 01:04:48 PM
Well nevermind then :-[  
Since you were llandre, you are probably well aware of my dorky-ness.  

A matchbox-size aquamarine...(sighs) how amazing that would have been to see!
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on May 16, 2006, 09:57:40 PM
Wobder if there are any sketches of the wonderful pink pearl necklace... ::)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on May 16, 2006, 10:53:56 PM
Quote
Yesterday while in London was able to visit the breathtaking exhibition held at Wartski (just off Bond Street) in aid of Charity.

From The Herald Tribune:

From czars to stars: A dazzling collection  Suzy Menkes MONDAY, MAY 15, 2006
 
 
LONDON 'When I was five, my grandmother - Queen Mary - used to give me her Fabergé parasol handle to play with to keep me quiet," said Prince Michael of Kent, reminiscing as he gazed at a collection of pre-revolutionary Russian treasures - not least his own personal pale blue sun-ray enamel cufflinks.
 
His wife, Marie Christine, admiring intense violet Siberian amethysts and sunset pink topaz, recalled the Fabergé egg bracelet she had received from the royal family heritage and that she wears ritually each Easter Sunday.
 
And Arina Malyshkova revealed her family's pride in bringing back to Russia, its native country, a recently purchased tiara.
 
Passionate collectors, guardians of family treasures and jewelry historians gathered last week at "Fabergé and the Russian Jewellers" (until May 20) at Wartski, 14 Grafton Street. The London jeweler, whose links with Russia go back to the 1920s, has cajoled loans of pieces that were first worn at marriages and coronations in an imperial age.
 
"There are things that have been known about but never actually seen - and until a month ago I had no idea of the intensity of the stones," said Katherine Purcell, the show's curator, who has worked for three years to bring together 260 glittering relics of the czars' family and its cousinhood of European royalty.
 
If they could only speak, these jewels would have extraordinary tales to tell. Showers of gems were offered to Frances Anne, the Marchioness of Londonderry, when she was pursued by her ardent admirer Czar Alexander I in 1821. Today, a pink topaz glints as richly as when it was worn by her descendant to a charity benefit, as seen in a 1924 photograph.
 
A royal family's diamond tiara set with pink spinels dazzles through its glass vitrine. Yet it could not persuade a prince's wife to stay with her husband. She ran off with the Austrian diplomat Count Metternich, and the jewels passed to the Duke of Westminster's family.
 
There is a proud provenance to the diamond cyphers that Empress Maria Feodorovna presented to her maids of honor; and also to a coronation trophy from 1896: a crown resting on twin cushions of diamonds that had a price tag higher than all the Fabergé Easter eggs.  :o
 
Perhaps the most poignant piece is a box labeled "A snowflake from Russia 1913" holding a Fabergé icicle brooch of rock crystal and diamonds - a symbol of an empire that was about to melt away.
 
Purcell has stories of her own: how a necklace of diamond links came into the store for valuation - and was identified as Fabergé. And how, helped by the Internet, she was able to access the records complied by Tatiana Fabergé and Valentin Skurlov and tell the owner of a pair of pink enamel cufflinks that they were originally a gift to Czar Nicholas II from his mother.
 
Then there was a more down to earth discovery: a Fabergé bow brooch found wedged in a drawer in a British stately home.
 
Most of the loans are anonymous, but the comedian Joan Rivers puts her name to a stag beetle brooch with diamond pincers and a fat opal body.
 
Although his name is a byword for imperial glamour in Anglo-Saxon countries, Purcell says that Carl Fabergé is not as well known in Contintental Europe. And in the Wartski exhibition, he is challenged by other Russian jewelers.
 
Two pieces from the Swedish court jeweler Bolin, founded by Carl Edvard Bolin, are a tiara in the shape of a kokoshnik, or cockscomb, commissioned by the grandson of Czar Nicholas I [would this be the tiara sold not too long ago that was Countess Torby's?]; while another tiara (now set with faux emeralds) has a history that takes it from the Russian royal family to Princess Marie of Romania in 1922. [I imagine this is Ella's tiara that then went to Mignon? I think it was purchased by Cartier]
 
For Purcell, the story is as much in the workmanship as the provenance. She picks out four sumptuous cloak clasps and a brooch in which a petit point pattern is worked in gem stones.
 
Geoffrey Munn, Wartski's managing director, calls the disposal of the Russian crown jewels in 1927 a "tragedy" and finds it miraculous that seven pieces that escaped are in this show, including a pair of cornflower sprays of sapphires dating from the daughter of Peter the Great.
 
Of an aquamarine lattice brooch originally bought in 1894 by the czarevitch Nicholas for his fiancée Princess Alix of Hesse, Munn says that in the "language of the lapidary these pale blue stones stand for love and the diamonds for eternity." They, like the rest of the jewels in this mesmerizing show, are history's staunch survivors.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Robert_Hall on May 17, 2006, 06:15:17 AM
The catalogue alone is worth the £8 admittance price ! A wonderful, intimate exhibit indeed. Unfortunately it is on only until the 20th of May.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Martyn on May 17, 2006, 07:44:30 AM
This really is an appalling admission, but I had no idea that this was on!  I am now filled with panic in trying to re-organise my schedule to see if I can get to Wartski.....

The Londonderry amethysts alone will be worth the trip - a truly magnificent gift by any standards.  If I do go, it will be another opportunity to meet the wonderful Geoffrey Munn, who was kind enough to give me my own personal guided tour of Wartski's collection of Fabergé, as well as some other truly historic and royal jewels......

I really can't believe that I have almost let this pass me by......!
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eddie_uk on May 17, 2006, 01:08:54 PM
I consider myself very fortunate to live in London :) but alas have a full house  :'( :'(

By the way, while I remember, Christies sent out a lovely A4 booklet regarding the Princess Margaret auction which showed the highlights of the sale and included some lovely pictures. If anyone is interested they could maybe ring up and ask for it to be sent to them? My Mum is on the mailing list and I think thats how I got hold of it.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Morecambrian on May 19, 2006, 12:15:13 PM
Quote
Wobder if there are any sketches of the wonderful pink pearl necklace... ::)
The necklace no doubt was the superb pearl sautoir that Alexandra wore so often in formal photographs. It too, sadly was probably among the pearls she wore in a belt in Ekatrinburg.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on May 19, 2006, 09:42:35 PM
Yes I believe the pearl satoir may have travel to Ekaterinburg. Glad the booch escape that fate. Wonder was that the same that Nicholas gave to Alix, but she gave back to Xenia afterwards ?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Morecambrian on May 20, 2006, 01:38:21 PM
Quote
Yes I believe the pearl satoir may have travel to Ekaterinburg. Glad the booch escape that fate. Wonder was that the same that Nicholas gave to Alix, but she gave back to Xenia afterwards ?
No the brooch was an engagement present. The brooch that  Alexandra gave him back and he passed on to Xenia was much earlier and no doubt a much more modest affair
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: B5218 on May 20, 2006, 03:25:02 PM
I never saw this fancy name tag brooch before.

Hello, my name is .....

(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4/B5218/whoisit2.jpg)

(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4/B5218/mynameis.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: B5218 on May 20, 2006, 03:33:34 PM
You don't see this necklace very often

Nizam of Hyderabad tiara
King George VI Bandeau Necklace
Photo by Baron @ 1952

(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4/B5218/Baron.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on May 20, 2006, 11:09:08 PM
I think it was stated on the Royal Jewels of the World board that it had been dismantled.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on May 21, 2006, 01:51:45 AM
Pity...Was it one that came from Queen Mary ?  :-?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Morecambrian on May 21, 2006, 02:45:11 AM
Quote
Pity...Was it one that came from Queen Mary ?  :-?
No it came with the necklace from the Nizam.The tiara was dismantled in 1974 to provide the stones (with 96 rubies from another necklace) for the Queens ruby and diamond flower tiara.The 3 detachable diamond roses were retained & are still worn as brooches by HM.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on May 21, 2006, 06:30:49 AM
Yes...There was a time Royalty recieved gifts of jewelry from their subjects. Now only from foreign dignities.  :-?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on May 23, 2006, 01:05:00 PM
I have recently purchased a copy of the DVD of the TV series'The Queens Castle'. In it there is a clip of the pre-garter ceromony luncheon. HM was wearing QV crown collet necklave and earings and Queen Mary's True Lovers Knot Brooch pinned to the front of her sash, i also noticed that Hm was wearing QV bar brooch pinnd to her sash (like Queen Victoria and Queen Mary) however it was at the back instead of on the shoulers. Does HM do this often? Is there any other pictures of her wearing it in this way?

Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: B5218 on June 03, 2006, 06:12:32 PM
The June issue of "Majesty" begins a series on the Queen's jewels.  This month features the Vladimir Tiara, the Cambridge Emerald Necklace, the Williamson Pink, The Cullinan V Heart Brooch, Queen Mary's True Lover's Knot Brooch, the 5th Wedding Anniversary Bracelet, and the Cartier Clips.  

Plus there is an article of Prince Philip at 85 and 6 pages of Prince Harry in Lesotho.

 ;D
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: esessions on June 03, 2006, 11:49:54 PM
this is The St Edwards Crown, which the monarch only wears once ever (at the coronation -the Imperial State Crown is worn otherwise) combined in this compoisite photo, with the George VI chandelier earrings on a very young QEII.  The photo is an obvious fake, but the earrings are amazing due to the fact that they represent all of the cuts for a diamond in 1948 (and beautifully set at that...)...






Quote
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/2a75954c.jpg)

Does anyone have another version of this picture? I have always found it odd, as in whether or not it is an actual photograph.
I only ask because I cannot identiify the brooch from this angle, my guesses are:
1. Surrey Brooch
2. Bottom section of Diamond Stomacher.

I also find it odd with the combination of quite victorian jewellry paired with the enormous St Edwards Crown. Is this the only picture there is of Her Majesty wearing this crown other then those of the actual coronation? I imagine it was taken around that time.
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/de964279.jpg)(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/41917b5e.jpg)
Does anyone else have guesses about the brooch?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Morecambrian on June 04, 2006, 02:42:33 AM
Quote
this is The St Edwards Crown, which the monarch only wears once ever (at the coronation -the Imperial State Crown is worn otherwise) combined in this compoisite photo, with the George VI chandelier earrings on a very young QEII.  The photo is an obvious fake, but the earrings are amazing due to the fact that they represent all of the cuts for a diamond in 1948 (and beautifully set at that...)...

The picture is obviously a composite one.The brooch is the lowest section of the stomacher.The earrings which today are never seen are according to a recent book originally from Mrs Greville's hoarde and then passed on as a wedding gift by her parents....




Quote
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/2a75954c.jpg)

Does anyone have another version of this picture? I have always found it odd, as in whether or not it is an actual photograph.
I only ask because I cannot identiify the brooch from this angle, my guesses are:
1. Surrey Brooch
2. Bottom section of Diamond Stomacher.

I also find it odd with the combination of quite victorian jewellry paired with the enormous St Edwards Crown. Is this the only picture there is of Her Majesty wearing this crown other then those of the actual coronation? I imagine it was taken around that time.
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/de964279.jpg)(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/41917b5e.jpg)
Does anyone else have guesses about the brooch?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: joye on June 06, 2006, 10:29:41 PM
Boffer,

This question was answe.red by me before in post 53 to your post 34.  Try looking on page 10.
The answer  is this picture was on the front cover of Post Magazine vol.59 no.11, dated 13th June, 1953. cost 1/-, one shilling.  I have a copy in front of me as I type this reply.  Majesty Magazine uses the

on its last page, [the royal world as seen through the eyes of Robert Golden].

Signed   HRH
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on June 15, 2006, 09:30:05 AM
Over on The Royal Forums, a poster wrote that Queen Mary's amethyst parure (the much discussed one that was sold by QEQM aka Cookie) came to Queen Mary through a charity lottery.  Now, I know that this was how the Cambridge emeralds came into the family, but I have never heard that about these jewels.  Does anybody know the origin of these pieces?

Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on June 15, 2006, 10:39:49 AM
I don't think they came from the lottery....What is the prove ?  :-?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on June 15, 2006, 10:47:10 AM
I don't remember there being a source cited.  

Doesn't seem right to me though, no family could be that lucky!

 

Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on June 15, 2006, 10:55:49 AM
I agree...I thought they came from the Victoire, Duchess of Kent's collection. ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on June 15, 2006, 12:04:33 PM
I think the poster was confused as to the origin of QM's amethyst set--I don't believe they came from a lottery like the Cambridge emeralds.

The set that was QM's that the Queen Mother sold was different from the Kent parure. That is still in possession of the Queen and likely will remain so. It's the oldest royal jewelry owned by the monarch (according to The Queen's Jewels) and QV left it directly to the Crown rather than an individual.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on June 15, 2006, 12:56:45 PM
Maybe it came from Queen Alexandra ?  :o
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on June 15, 2006, 01:02:06 PM
No, it seems to have been Queen Mary's. One of the few pictures of her wearing it dates from early on in her tenure as Dss of York. There's no record of QA giving it to her as a wedding present or such. The auction note didn't mention any other royal owner apart from QM either, if I remember correctly. QA did apparently give a few amethyst pieces to the Queen Mother--I don't know what became of them. The royals don't seem particularly fond of amethysts--QA excluded. One of QA's amethyst necklaces is currently owned by Don Johnson's wife so obviously some have been sold.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Robert_Hall on June 15, 2006, 02:22:51 PM
were amethysts used for mourning at one time ?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on June 15, 2006, 03:16:05 PM
Yes they were considered appropriate for mourning.  Or was it half-mourning?  :-/

The parure wouldn't have been some sort of strange engagement gift when May became engaged while still in mourning for Eddy would it?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Morecambrian on June 15, 2006, 03:23:48 PM
This has all been talked about at length before on it's own thread.Q Alexandra's parue passed to her grand daughter Maud of Fife, later Lady Maud Carnegie.The Duchess of Kents set is Part of the royal collection.The set that was sold is Queen Marys.....
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on June 15, 2006, 03:35:04 PM
The origin of Queen Mary's set was discussed on that thread?  

My apologies then, I will have to look back to see if it is viewable.  Sorry.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on June 15, 2006, 08:15:39 PM
Unfortunately, I think that's one of the inaccessible threads--along with most of the jewelry threads.  :( That's a LOT of information that's in limbo.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: joye on June 15, 2006, 08:17:17 PM
In reply to Post 146

The necklace worn by QEII is the bandeau necklace,  bought by her parents GeoVI and Q.Mum as a wedding present.  It is of Victorian workmanship.
Reference Leslie Field book Page 140.

It is great, to see QEII wearing the Nizam's necklace again. Official portrait of 2002 Jubilee visit to Canada.  She wore it often in the early years of her reign.

Leslie Field says the necklace was a wedding gift, a Cartier platinum and diamond necklace and pendant designed to represent English roses and foliage. Reference Page 143.

Signed  HRH
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: joye on June 15, 2006, 08:36:51 PM
emeraldeyes, you mention in reply 99, regarding Duchess of Cornwalls lily of the valley brooch, GREMB and RJOTWMB.

Would you be kind enough to tell me what the letters stand for, as these seem to be good refernces that you use
Thank you.

Sighned   HRH
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on June 16, 2006, 02:51:19 AM
Could be from QA's collection, as she likes to give them as wedding presents. I think she gave some to Princess Alice (Princess Andrew of Greece) when she got married in Darmstadt.  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eddie_uk on June 16, 2006, 03:21:55 AM
RJOTWMB -Royal Jewels of the World Message Board

GREMB: Glittering Royal Events Message Board

 :) :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: TampaBay on July 05, 2006, 01:39:27 PM
I think Chuck needs to buy Cammie a completely new completely modern parue simply for my personal enjoyment of viewing and commenting.

TampaBay
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 05, 2006, 09:19:15 PM
Not likely as Chuck is a history junkie and loves tradition.  :(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: TampaBay on July 06, 2006, 05:20:33 AM
Well Chuck needs to start his own tradition.

TampaBay
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 06, 2006, 05:39:28 AM
Hard to force someone to become something they are not. However he might buy her the odd trinket there and then. But I doubt he would buy her a completely new parure. There are too much unused jewelry to float around.  :(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: TampaBay on July 06, 2006, 06:17:17 AM
True, But will the public balk if she wears heirloom pieces from Queen Mary & Alexandra?

TampaBay
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 06, 2006, 06:34:00 AM
They are already balking !  ;)

Seriously Camilla has to find her own style. As wife of Charles, she should wear the tradional jewels.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on July 06, 2006, 02:43:43 PM
Quote
True, But will the public balk if she wears heirloom pieces from Queen Mary & Alexandra?

TampaBay

She's worn QM's Delhi Durbar to a State event and I think some of the pins she's worn were traced back to Queen Alexandra.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on July 06, 2006, 03:05:21 PM
As far as the general public is concerned, I don't think they would be aware of the provenence of anything the Duchess might choose to wear.  With the exception of the pieces most closely associated with the late Princess of Wales (ie the Lover's Knot tiara, Queen Mary's choker) she could probably wear anything in the vaults and not have anyone bat an eye.  Any uproar would likely be instigated by the more bombastic British newspapers.  
The general public is not really interested in these things as much as we are.  

Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 06, 2006, 05:54:33 PM
Agreed ! Us and the editors of MAJESTY and ROYALTY Magazine !

Also as long as the style suits Camilla. The tall tiaras did not seem to agree with her hairstyles.  :(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Faberge on July 10, 2006, 01:42:15 AM
Quote
Most thanks for the wonderful pictures. :)
And whilst I like the Kent Suite, Queen Mary's parure is stunning, such a shame it was sold :(



It's scandalous in fact. Why did she sell it off? Being that shades of purple are considered royal , a purple suite is imperative! Georgie would be very cross!
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 10, 2006, 02:38:52 AM
Well somebody must have disliked it enough to be sold. I wonder who that would be.... :-?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on July 10, 2006, 10:02:50 AM
It was Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother who sold it so I would presume it was she who didn't care for it.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Faberge on July 10, 2006, 10:41:23 AM
I don't know when she sold it but it's possible she wanted the wherewithal to purchase the Castle of Mey. Then there's always the possibility that it had bad associations for her but  I rather think it was the cash and an offer she received at the right moment because I dare say that many of her jewels never came out of mothballs because they didn't suit her taste.

Thank you Ella and Eric. :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on July 10, 2006, 12:53:29 PM
Was it not sold to cover some costs or debts relating to the Queen Mothers horses, or horse racing?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 27, 2006, 08:37:09 PM
Could be, although I persume those were in the Queen Mum's pocession. Once QE II took over the Royal Jewels. She took care of that and I bet she still kept the bulk in the boxes Queen Mary stored them. 
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: pouvoir aux canards on July 30, 2006, 11:04:08 AM
I KNOW that this thread concerns the Windsor's jewels, but ... there is no thread about Habsburg jewels (and the skilled members are here) ... so... did anyone has an idea about some Marie-Valerie' or Gisela' tiaras?? All photographies of the two archduchesses are WITHOUT that sort of jewels... And also Stéphanie:  NOT A PICTURE (not a one I know) in a court dress with jewels... I saw once a thumb about a misterious MARIE-VALERIE's TIARA but the browser was unable to send me to a picture... the links were closed...

I am NOT specialised in jewels nor the topic interestests me passionately, but the fact seems a little strange... I know austrian jewels disapeared after WW1, but anyway  Empresses Elisabeth and Zita were pictured with jewels... why not Gisela, Marie-Valerie and Stéphanie ??.Stephanie assumed so many ceremonies and also Gisela ...

A second answer : I never saw a picture of the weddings of Gisela, Rudolph, Marie-Valerie. It seems also impossible to see a normal sized picture of the wedding of Franz-Joseph and Elisabeth (and I say nothing more about Elisabeth' sisters weddings and Franz-Joseph' brothers weddings...

best  regards

Claire
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Robert_Hall on July 30, 2006, 12:18:54 PM
Thos topic- Habsburg Jewels would probably get better response-pictures- if posted  on the Habsburg thread ?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on July 30, 2006, 03:08:35 PM
was it my imagination that there was  a conversation about the summer opening of buckingham palace and the jewellery exhitit? or has it been deleted?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Robert_Hall on July 30, 2006, 03:11:34 PM
It must have been lost. BuckHouse this summer is dispalying some of the Queen's gowns and jewelry during the "open season".
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on July 30, 2006, 06:05:17 PM
A Habsburg section has now been created.

When the Forum started it was originally devoted to the Imperial family and their closest relatives. Bob and Rob graciously allowed more and more sections to be opened in response to popular demand. When I first came on, I don't think half the sections were here that are now. There wasn't enough of an interest in the Habsburgs to open a separate section--there obviously is now--and so individual threads were put into the Hohenzollern one probably because of the close alliance between Germany & Austria during this time period. There really wasn't any other category that matched in any way since there was only one Habsburg marital link to the Romanovs--familial connection is what normally determined a section. The Italian royal family also was put in the Hohenzollerns until it was 'spun off' as well.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Robert_Hall on July 30, 2006, 07:01:24 PM
Thank you, GDElla. The Habsburgs are finaaly free of those upstart Prussians !
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: pouvoir aux canards on July 31, 2006, 01:48:57 PM
A Habsburg section has now been created.

 :-* Thank you also here...  ;D :D :)  ...  is it possible to insert all Habsburg topics still working in the new thread ? ::)? ::)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on July 31, 2006, 05:24:34 PM
I didn't create it but it looks like the majority of topics have been moved there.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 08, 2006, 04:13:58 PM
Has anyone bee able to get a hold of the getty images pics from the Dress for the Occasion exhibition that show the Cambridge emeralds hanging in mid air?  They have been posted elsewhere on the web with watermarks, but if anyone could provide non-watermarked versions, well, that would be amazing!!!
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 08, 2006, 08:33:04 PM
That would depend if someone has a copy of the photo itself I think... ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on August 08, 2006, 08:54:06 PM
The Corbis site (where you can get them without the watermark) only has the aquamarines--hopefully they'll add more of the other jewels. They have a lot of the dresses as well.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on August 08, 2006, 09:05:57 PM
Actually, they do have the necklace but that's all so far:

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/42-171216651.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 09, 2006, 08:27:52 AM
The necklace itself was on the cover of the Field book, but not this particular picture.  The way the jewels are displayed in the exhibition, they seem to be viewable 'in the round' suspended somehow within a clear display case that is freestanding; you can see the backs of the jewels in addition to the fronts.   :o
Thanks GDella I will check out the Corbis site.  Hopefully they end up with all the pics!  :)

Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 09, 2006, 10:19:47 PM
I like the hung in mid air concept.... ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on August 10, 2006, 11:44:41 PM
It seems that Lilibet really loves the Girls of Britain and Ireland tiara.  I would imagine she associates it with Queen Mary (doesn't she refer to it as "Granny's tiara").

Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 11, 2006, 02:04:05 AM
Yes...The Queen has a great respect for her Granny's favourite jewels.  :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: TampaBay on August 11, 2006, 05:10:50 AM
I think that was also on the cover of Leslie Fields's book ???  ???

How many Fields books are there?  My book has QEII wearing  a gold dress and rubies on thte cover.


TampaBay
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 11, 2006, 05:14:15 AM
Mabe a second print. I bought the first one.  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on August 11, 2006, 10:05:01 AM
The Fields book should not be taken up blindly.... there is much of interest but also plenty of mistakes.... :-\
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on August 11, 2006, 10:39:33 AM
The worst part is, my copy, that I bought used, at Half-Price Books is missing quite a few pages.  And they didin't just fall out-someone cut out some of the pages, sometimes HALF of one page, etc.  I didn't even realize it until I got home.

Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eddie_uk on August 11, 2006, 11:17:09 AM
I like the Suzie Menkes (sp?) book very much, full of nice pictures and interesting tales. Anyone else like it?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 11, 2006, 12:10:33 PM
Yes...nice pics too, but some mistakes as well.  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 11, 2006, 12:18:02 PM
I like the Menkes book, although there are mistakes in that one too.
 As I've just posted on the RJOTW message board, I think I'm missing a page in that book.  I got it from Ebay a few months ago and just recently noticed that someone has (quite skillfully) removed a page near the beginning of the book.  It would be on the right side opposite the last page of the preface.   >:( grrr.

If I had to choose one book over the other though, I would still take the Field book.  The quality of the photographs is sooo much better than in the Menkes book.  And I much prefer Field's writing style. 

JMO of course, JMO. 
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on August 11, 2006, 12:31:47 PM
The Field book is far better than the Menkes which has countless mistakes and suppositions...
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on August 11, 2006, 01:49:07 PM
Doesn't the Menkes book allege that the Cambridge Lover's Knot tiara was part of the Russian jewels bought post-Revolution? That's what this page from it, from when it was on ebay, looks like.

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/79_11.jpg)

I mean, good Lord, that's enough to turn me off of the book right there!  >:(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on August 11, 2006, 03:07:29 PM
The Menkes book is particulary bed on the Duchess of Windsor's gems.When the old girl died and there was the great sale we found out that the rubies Ms Menkes had talked about were emeralds or amethysts etc.......Yet it was supposed to be an authorative work.Still it was a best seller...
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on August 11, 2006, 03:09:13 PM
Sorry I meant bad !!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 11, 2006, 03:27:30 PM
GDella, the caption on the pages that you posted reads:

"The Princess of Wales was given the pearl and diamond tiara by the Queen on her marriage in 1981(2).  The tiara (1), with its diamond lovers' knots and 19 drop pearls, was made for Queen Mary (3) by Garrard in 1914 using pearls she had been given as a wedding present.  The tiara originally had a row of upstanding pearl spikes (5).  An almost identical bow-knot tiara belonging to the Youssoupov family was unearthed in a secret cache in Russia by the Bolsheviks in 1925 (4).  It had belonged to the granddaughter of Queen Alexandra's sister Minnie.
The first of the series of the bow-knot tiaras, all made in the 1820s, was given to Augusta, Duchess of Cambridge, the daughter in law of Gerorge III.  That tiara was inherited by Queen Mary's Aunt Augusta and left to her granddaughter.   Queen Mary left her tiara to her granddaughter the Queen (6) who wore it as a young woman but then put it away in store."


While I'm at it, I really don't care for the way the photos are captioned in the Menkes book.  It seems very sloppy.  Just go clockwise or counter clockwise.  Is that so much to ask????
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 11, 2006, 03:30:19 PM
a couple of references-
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v289/Markhall/Alex-19.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v289/Markhall/Alex-18.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on August 11, 2006, 06:55:48 PM
Thanks for that clarification, EE.  :) I saw 'Tale of a Tiara' and the pictures and thought 'oh Lord, another Queen Mary/Romanov jewels falsity'.  :P

If one has the Fields book, is it worth getting the Menkes book (errors and all) for the photos?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 11, 2006, 07:41:06 PM
I would have to say yes.

There are some nice pictures and some interesting information that isn't in Field - at the very end there are four appendices (sp?).

Appendix A - list of "The Crown Jewellery" (a list that was longer than I thought it would be)
Appendix B - The Royal Family Orders (detailed descriptions of the family orders of GV, GVI and EII)
Appendix C - "List of the Personal Jewels Worn by HM the Queen on State and Semi-State Occasions"
Appendix D - Jewellers Holding Royal Warrants
No doubt that the last two appendices are out of date/incomplete now, but interesting nonetheless.

As far as 'photos that you've never seen before', the list would probably be short, but there is a nice b+w pic of the bird clip with the immense sapphire that was stolen in the robbery of the Duchess of Windsor's jewels.  This is the only picture I have ever seen of it, so I suppose that is one of the highlights for me. 
There are also a few pics of some of Queen Alexandra's lesser known (at least lesser known to me) items that were as Menkes termed them "Fruits of the Empire" - items that originated in India. 

I would give the book a thumbs up generally, and Field is much better, but can you really ever have too many books about jewels?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eddie_uk on August 12, 2006, 09:39:13 AM
I've just been to Buckingham Palace to see the Queens dresses and jewellery exhibition. I thoroughly recommend going. The dresses are very nice (very timeless & elegant she could wear many of them today). Also it was a treat to see the jewels especially Queen Marys emeralds and the Vladimir tiara. Also in Buckingham Palace their was a lovely statue of Princess Louise of Wales as a girl and one of Princesses Victoria and Maud together, they were interesting to see and both were very good likeness's. Also in one of the little rooms they had the Winterhalten portraits of Vicky, Alice, Louise and Beatrice all facing each other, but not one of Helena.

EDIT: The Brazillian tiara I though much more impressive in the flesh!!! really quite impressive.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 12, 2006, 10:48:06 AM
Oooh you lucky lucky lucky lucky lucky ducky Eddieboy....I am turning all shades of green right now!!  Was there a catalogue?  Were you allowed to take pictures?  Which dress was the most intricate/beautifully crafted? 
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on August 12, 2006, 05:56:14 PM
Well, I ordered two Menkes books from the library-I figure the photos will make it worthwhile.

Whatever happened to Augusta's lover's knot tiara?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on August 13, 2006, 03:11:40 AM
Augusta's lovers knot tiara was inherited  by her elder daughter (and Queen Marys  much loved aunt)Grand Duchess Augusta of Mecklemberg -Strelitz..On her death in 1916 the tiara passed to her younger grandaughter Charlotte who had married Danilo,the Crown Prince of Montenegro and was known as Militza. The childless couple settled (in exile) in Rome near his sister Queen Elena of Italy. In 1946 after her death the diadem came back to the family of  her elder sister the former Duchess Marie of M-S. In 1987 it was sold in Geneva by Christies( who a few years earlier had sold another exact replica of unknown provenance). The Youssoupoff version was in that family at least in 1855 when Princess Tatiana Alexandrovna Y was painted wearing it in her portrait by Winterhalter(for pic's, see that thread). There is yet another in the series which was worn by Amalia of Bavaria,wife of Otto erstwhile King of Greece,it passed back to the Bavarian royal family and was worn by later royal ladies (and is now -I think -in the residenz museum in Munich).Augusta left Queen Mary the stupendous suite of sapphires which later passed to the Kents and has often been mentioned on here.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eddie_uk on August 13, 2006, 08:08:46 AM
Hi EE :) Photography was not allowed sadly :( I don't think their was a catalogue hon, but they usually publish a book to accompany these kind of exhibitions but don't recall seeing one.

All the dresses were nice I thought. Pride of place in the centre of the room was the one from the 1970s with the white fur trim, I forget the name of it but the Queen wore it twice (maybe someone can post a picture?). The Queens figure in the younger days was lovely. She had a tiny waist!  :) Also their was some very nice photos of the Queen wearing the dresses.

Not to bore, but I loved the outfit the Queen wore to Princess Margarets wedding, she looked lovely.  :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eddie_uk on August 13, 2006, 08:51:56 AM
Come to think of it, I dont think the dress worn by the Queen when JFK and Jackie met her was displayed  ???

Apparently Jackie later said she felt the Queen resented her. Oh PURLEASE!!!  ::) ::)

Here are a couple of scans from a small leaflet. :)

(http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/9337/queenhc2.jpg)

(http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/7500/queen2gf7.jpg)

(http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/954/queen3eg9.jpg)

I apologise for the scans, I just can't comprehend it.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: TampaBay on August 13, 2006, 09:18:29 AM
The Queen never resented Jackie she just perferred the Eisenhower's and the Truman's.

Think about it; The queens favorite place to visit in the USA is Lexington, Kentucky.  I think this about sums it up.  QEII likes the racing side of the horse industry and Jackie was a fox hunting type of girl.  ;D ;D ;D

TampaBay
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 13, 2006, 11:51:46 AM
Eddieboy thanks for the report.  Is this the dress that you referred to?  It was posted on another message board recently...I would give credit but the name escapes me at the moment.

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/Fur-trimmedsilvercoat.jpg)


Amazing if you ask me!
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eddie_uk on August 13, 2006, 11:56:49 AM
You are welcome Yes!!! Thank you EE. I think that was the star attraction, it is lovely. Don't you think the Queen could still wear that today??

I wish you could have seen the emeralds they were amazing and the aquamarines, oh and I liked a ruby (?) rose bracelet too, that was on display. It was so busy when I went, but it was nice to see so many interested. It just shows you how popular it all is.
 :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on August 13, 2006, 12:04:44 PM
You mean Queen Mary's "Rose of York" bracelet?

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/200144.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eddie_uk on August 13, 2006, 12:05:57 PM
Yes that is the one! thank you Quinastasia :) Does the Queen wear that one much?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 13, 2006, 04:25:44 PM
I don't think she wears it much at all, here's a pic from the Field book, I htink there's another one somewhere in colour...will have to check.

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/qeIIrofybr.jpg)

And yes, I think that fur trimmed coat and dress would not be out of place at a gala or state occasion even now.  I would wear it.  How 'bout you Tampa?

Her Majesty certainly enjoys her fur doesn't she?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 13, 2006, 04:46:17 PM
Found two more...

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/tiaraycollar.jpg)(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/A04.jpg)

Wasn't that ruby necklace in the exhibiton as well?  I really like that one.  As a matter fact, I think most of HM's ruby jewels are beyond exquisite.  With the exception of course of the 'Tiara for the Royal Fireworks'.  I wonder if Handel plays in the background whenever she enters a room wearing that...
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on August 13, 2006, 11:49:07 PM
I hate fur-at least, real fur.  I'd only wear it if it's vintage-early 1960s or older, and even then I'd only wear trim, not a full coat.

Her Majesty does seem to favor the Girls of Ireland and Great Britain tiara, doesn't she? 
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on August 14, 2006, 01:18:49 AM
Found two more...

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/tiaraycollar.jpg)(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/A04.jpg)

Wasn't that ruby necklace in the exhibiton as well?  I really like that one.  As a matter fact, I think most of HM's ruby jewels are beyond exquisite.  With the exception of course of the 'Tiara for the Royal Fireworks'.  I wonder if Handel plays in the background whenever she enters a room wearing that...
I think the ruby tiara which was made in 1974 ,is lovely and far nicer than the sapphire or aquamarine ones in HM's collection. :)












9
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eddie_uk on August 14, 2006, 02:08:37 AM
Yes that lovely ruby necklace was in the exhibiton too. Thak you for the pics. I think fur looks very glamorous, especially those fur wraps the Queen was very fond of when she was younger. I think Marilyn Monroe wore one in Some Like It Hot and looked great  ;D
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ChristineM on August 14, 2006, 03:51:29 AM
I saw the Queen in that dress and coat - from a distance - many years ago.   I remember she looked sensational.   Everybody literally gasped and held their breath when she entered.   The combination of outfit, tiara and chandelier earrings, and under lights, was indescribable.    'Dazzling' is insufficient a word.   I was too young to notice which tiara she was wearing, but the impact of the ensemble will last for ever.

It was not 'over the top'.   She is the Queen, the occasion called for it, despite being in the morning, and she is the only person in the world who could pull it off.   In that outfit there was absolutely not doubting, this little lady was the monarch.

tsaria   
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on August 14, 2006, 01:07:17 PM
Indeed ! Although my favourite is still the Russian Fringe !  ;)

I like that one too-but my favorite is the Grand Duchess Vladimir tiara-either with the original pearls, or the Cambridge emeralds.

But I like the Russian fringe because of its connections to Queen Alexandra, and how she had it based on the one her sister wore in Russia.

My guess is that Lilibet likes the GGBI tiara so much because it's "Granny's Tiara". 

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/th_AADS001582.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/AADS001582.jpg)
What set is this again?  Especially the tiara?


(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/th_AADS001347.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/AADS001347.jpg)
Are these the Kent amethysts?

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/th_71525987.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/71525987.jpg)
Where did the aquamarine set come from again?

The Vladimir:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/th_AADS004397.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/AADS004397.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/th_AADS001464.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/AADS001464.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/th_AADS001486.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/AADS001486.jpg)
I believe that's Victoria's Jubilee necklace? 


Here are some of the Russian fringe:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/th_AADS001444.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/AADS001444.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/th_AADS001349.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/AADS001349.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/th_AADS001440.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/AADS001440.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/th_AADS004429.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/AADS004429.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/th_AADS001466.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/AADS001466.jpg)


More of the Vladimir:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/th_dresses3.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/dresses3.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/th_200145_2.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/200145_2.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/th_200145.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/200145.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/th_vladimir2.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/vladimir2.jpg)

 (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/th_vladimir1.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/vladimir1.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/th_QueenElizabeth-ValdimirTiarawithcam.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/QueenElizabeth-ValdimirTiarawithcam.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/th_whatisit.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/whatisit.jpg)


Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eddie_uk on August 14, 2006, 01:10:51 PM
I think the Aquamarines came from Brazil? and HM had the tiara made to go with them. I'm not a fan of it but it's very impressive in the flesh I thought.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 14, 2006, 08:27:20 PM
Would love to see the Queen wear it more often with her other ruby jewels.  :D
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on August 14, 2006, 09:23:38 PM

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/th_AADS001347.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/AADS001347.jpg)
Are these the Kent amethysts?

Yes they are.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on August 14, 2006, 09:30:45 PM
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/th_71525987.jpg) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/71525987.jpg)
Where did the aquamarine set come from again?

Per Leslie Fields:

'In 1953 the President and people of Brazil presented the Queen with a Coronation gift of a necklace and matching pendant earrings of aquamarines and diamonds. It had taken an entire year to collect the perfectly matched stones. The necklace had nine large oblong aquamarines each in a diamond scroll setting with an even bigger oblong aquamarine pendant drop...The Queen has since had the pendant drop reset in a more ornate diamond cluster and it is now detachable from the necklace...in 1957 she had a relatively simple tiara made to wear with it...In August 1958 the Brazilian government added to their original gift with a bracelet of seven large oblong aquamarines set in clusters of small diamonds. There was also a brooch to match the original setting of the pendant, a single large square aquamarine in a simple diamond setting. In 1968 the Queen and Prince Phillip made their first State visit to Brazil and the Governor of Sao Paulo presented the Queen with a V-shaped 'hair ornament', as it was described at the time, also made of aquamarines and diamonds. In 1971 the stones from this were used to make four scroll-shaped motifs for the tiara, positioned around the three upright oblongs; a collect aquamarine was placed on the tip of each of the seven vertical ornaments.'
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 14, 2006, 09:37:30 PM
Guinastasia, the sapphires 'The King George VI Victorian Suite'  were a wedding present from her father.  According to Field:  "In 1947 King George gave Princess Elizabeth a long necklace of oblong sapphires surrounded by round diamonds and separated by diamond collets as a wedding gift.  To match it there was a pair of free-swinging, square-shaped sapphire earrings, bordered with diamonds and hanging from three collet stones.  The suite was made around 1850.  The colour of the stones exactly matched the blue of the Garter Riband, although this choice may have been a coincidence on the part of the King.  In 1952 the Queen had the necklace shortened by removing the largest stone, plus one of the smaller sapphires, and in 1959 a pendant was made using the big stone. "

The rather unfortunate tiara was made up in 1963.  A bracelet was also added at this time. 

I don't know why, but those sapphires frequently look like amethysts in pictures. 
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on August 14, 2006, 10:08:03 PM
You mean Queen Mary's "Rose of York" bracelet?

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/200144.jpg)

This was a wedding present from GV to Queen Mary. QM often wore the detachable center as a pin. She gave the bracelet to EII as a wedding present in 1947.

QM wearing the center as pin:

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/queen%20mary/Picture2084aaw-1.jpg)
(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/queen%20mary/Picture2084aaroseofyorkw.jpg)

and as a bracelet:
(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/queen%20mary/M2-2169171w.jpg)
(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/queen%20mary/M2-2169171roseofyorkw.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 14, 2006, 10:30:49 PM
I love these old pieces that could be detached and wore as something else. It is so economiical than the jewels today. Just think a parure can include necklaces( detached into 2 bracelets) with pendents (detached as booches), earinggs and tiara ( also detasched into booches or dress ornament) .... ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on August 14, 2006, 11:54:50 PM
Yes, another reason I like the Vladimir-you can wear it with pearls or emeralds.  Or the Girls of Great Britain and Ireland Tiara, which has a removable base. 

Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 15, 2006, 12:32:57 AM
I guess that is one the the reasons while the Queen like it much. I think much of QM's jewels fall under that removable and detachable catagory.  :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on August 15, 2006, 02:35:22 AM
Queen Mary does seem to have been a fan of adaptable jewels but it was very common in the Era which she lived. Versatile jewelry was a noticable feature of late Victorian/Edwardian jewelry.In the 1930's the trend was ressurected by amongst others Cartier (who made diamond dress clips that could be worn on bangles made of a variety of materials from platinum to lacquer) and Fulco Di Verdura who made a bejewelled cigarette case with a central diamond sunburst for Cole Porter.The centrepiece was detachable for the composer's wife Linda to wear as a brooch.:)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 15, 2006, 04:48:26 AM
Thanks for the good information...Twice !  ;D

It is sad that jewelers seldom make adaptable jewels anymore.  :(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: royal_netherlands on August 15, 2006, 06:51:11 AM
(http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f78/opzich/20460correctie.jpg)
I found this picture, and I was wondering which jewels is she wearing, Tiara?
Thanks in advance

RN :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on August 15, 2006, 10:04:05 AM
The tiara is now in the collection of TRH the Duke & Duchess of Gloucester.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on August 15, 2006, 11:24:52 AM
Okay, I checked out a few books on royal jewelry.  It seems that tiara of the Queen Mum's that we all think is so ugly is called the Boucheron Honeycomb tiara (the honeycomb part I saw on a google search). 


(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Guinastasia/History/tir20gb20Honeycomb1.jpg)

Is it not the most hideous thing? 


And another question-according to Tiaras: a History of Splendour, the diamond fringe tiara was made for Queen Mary.  BUT, I thought it originally belonged to King George III!  What gives?  I know Princess Marina had one that was similiar (except it couldn't be converted into a necklace).  It seems that Princess Mary, the Princess Royal, also had one that could be made into a necklace.  So which was the one from George III, that Victoria is wearing in that painting of Prince Arthur's christening?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 15, 2006, 12:06:14 PM
I do think it is ugly at all. Especially displayed like this.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eddie_uk on August 15, 2006, 12:09:38 PM
Thank you for posting the pic Guinastasia. :)

It's quite chunky and not very elegant but I don't think its' to bad! :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 15, 2006, 12:17:50 PM
I think it looked better in its original form (without the vertical clusters on the top). 

Truly a monumental piece of jewelry. 

As for the fringe tiara, it is surmised that the original one (as worn by QV in The First of May) went back to Queen Charlotte's relations after the inheritance issues were finally resolved. (Do I have that right?)  The fringe tiara that is currently in the possession of the RF is the one that QM had made.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eddie_uk on August 15, 2006, 12:22:10 PM
I think EE one was given to Queen Alexandra on her 25th Wedding Anniversary, a really lovely piece that is.
The other one was worn by QEII on her wedding day which I think came from QV. However, I stand corrected!
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 15, 2006, 12:32:32 PM
Queen Alexandra's silver wedding gift tiara from the 'ladies of society' is a kokoshnik style.  Sort of fringe-like I suppose, but much more substantial, higher and bigger.  The fringe tiaras are more delicate. 
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on August 15, 2006, 12:45:57 PM
(http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f78/opzich/20460correctie.jpg)
I found this picture, and I was wondering which jewels is she wearing, Tiara?
Thanks in advance

RN :)


She's wearing the Iveagh tiara. It was a wedding gift from Lord and Lady Iveagh. She gave it to Alice, Duchess of Gloucester--I'm not sure if it was for the wedding or left to her in QM's will. It's often worn by the current Duchess of Gloucester. QM's also wearing the Dorset Bow brooch--another wedding gift. It's currently in the possession of EII.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 15, 2006, 12:51:01 PM
A few pics of the Queen Alexandra Silver Wedding kokoshnik...

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/qeIIkokoshnik.jpg)(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/qeIIkokoshnikII.jpg)
(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/qeIIkokoshnikIII.jpg)(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/qeIIkokoshnikIV.jpg)
(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/qeIIkokoshnikV.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on August 15, 2006, 12:54:21 PM
There are a number of fringe tiaras floating around the British RF.

QA had the Russian fringe one given to her for her 25th wedding anniversary.

Leslie Field says the one QV wore in The First of May portrait passed to QM who gave it to the Queen Mother in 1937 who in turn gave it to EII as a wedding present. Princess Anne wore it for her wedding.

Pss Louise, Duchess of Fie had one. She often wore it as a necklace--most notably at GV's wedding when she wore the Fife tiara.

Pss Mary was given one as a wedding present.

Pss Marina, Dss of Kent received one as a wedding present from the City of London. She wore it on her wedding day, as did her daughter Pss Alexandra.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on August 15, 2006, 12:55:12 PM
(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/qeIIkokoshnikV.jpg)

She's wearing her wedding fringe tiara as a necklace here.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 15, 2006, 01:26:02 PM
I thought that maybe that was the fringe necklace wedding present...I have a hard time distinguishing the difference between them.???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on August 15, 2006, 01:27:33 PM
The fringe necklace was actually a wedding present in 1947 from the city of London and is strung on silk.The wedding tiara which is less grand than Queen Alexandra's fringe tiara has not been worn as a necklace.The Queen Mother owned YET ANOTHER diamond fringe tiara/necklace which she inherited from Princess Victoria sister of George V in 1935,(Current whereabouts not known).Mary,Princess Royal's fringe tiara was bought after her death by the Grovesnor family,Dukes of Westminster.The Current Duke & Duchess have lent their stupendous collection of jewels to numerous exhibitions over the years.The fringe was shown at  charity exhibitions in Manchester and (much earlier in 1981 ) at Eaton Hall their palatial estate near Chester.The Grovesnor collection also includes at least 5 other tiara's 2 by Faberge.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eddie_uk on August 15, 2006, 01:50:34 PM
The Grovesnor collection also includes at least 5 other tiara's 2 by Faberge.


Goodness  :o :o do they manage to wear them all at once??
Title: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: Nadezhda Edvardovna on August 15, 2006, 02:47:54 PM
I've been enjoying the discussion of the Windsor jewels.  Here's a question:

Are the Windsors charged gift tax or fees when they receive such valuable gifts of jewelry?  Here in the United States, we're supposed to pay tax on gifts worth over $10,000, and government officials must pay fair market value for gifts from anybody other than the immediate family.

Pax, Nadezhda
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on August 15, 2006, 03:08:48 PM
Princess Victoria's Fringe Necklace passed back into the main branch of the royal family after her death and was worn occasionsly by Her majesty Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother.

I think it is safe to pressume that although it is indeed possible to take tiaras off their frames and wear them as necklaces, i do not think the Hanoverain Fringe Tiara (also known as Queen Mary's) will ever be worn as a necklace because of the fact that Her Majesty already has (at least) two fringe necklaces.

It does seem a rather envious position to be in, that they have simplily too many jewels to wear; but of course we only ever seem to see the same pieces and i think that it is safe to say that Her Majesty has her favourite pieces and other pieces that wouldnt be subitle to fulfil the image of Queen, after all as Her Majesty has said herself; she doesnt like wearing jewellery unless she has to and therefore she wears jewellery not because she likes it but as props to her status and symbols of her being queen (the tiara is an everyday version of the Imperial State Crown). That is just my opinion of how Her Majesty regards her jewel collection, and she doesnt allow the contents of the vults to flow freely to any family members who need a tiara; instead i believe that she sees herself as custodian of the monarchy and its collections and she wants to maintain the huge jewel collection as one.
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: boffer on August 15, 2006, 03:18:20 PM
Most of the gifts Her Majesty recieves are gifts from other heads of states or commitees; and there isnt a tax gifts. Also a reason why the main collection of jewellery has been remained so large is because of the fact that the queen is exempt from inheritance tax; unlike the Harewoods and Kents, and most recently the children of the late Princess Margaret the queen does not sell the jewels to cover death duties and therefore those jewels that she inherits are either worn or just lay in the vaults.

The State gifts the queen actually recieves are technically private gifts to the queen, just like the gifts Her Majesty presents of state visits are actually purchased from her private income; althought she views them as gifts that belong to the state and therefore will most probably be transfered to the royal collection upon her death. An example of this, is that when Lord Linley and Lady Sarah were selling Princess Margarets wedding gifts from the people of new Zealand and the recent Christies auction, Her Majesty requested that the proceeds from this lot would be donated to charity, since that although it was a wedding gift it was from a state; another example of private gifts being regarded as state gifts are that when Queen Alexandra died without a will her jewels were divided between her remaining children and Queen Mary made sure that all gifts that had been given to the late Queen by public bodies, or to the Queen when acting as representative of the monarchy should remain with the crown.

I do not know if this is what you meant by your question, but simply the queen does not have to pay taxes on the gifts she recieves; but at the end of the day she does not view them as personal property and therefore they will most probably be left to the Royal Collection upon her death (which is held in trust for the nation) so essentially the gifts she recieves are treated as belonging to the state and she merely accepts them on our behalf.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on August 15, 2006, 05:06:14 PM
So many to keep track of.  :-\ I think these are correct. *fingers crossed*

Kokoshnik: Given to Pss of Wales for her 25th wedding anniversary by Lady Salisbury on behalf of 365 peeresses of the United Kingdom. It was made by Garrard.  It is formed of 61 platinum bars graduating from the centre in the eighteenth-century manner and totally encrusted with 488 diamonds, of which the two largest are 3.25 carats each

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/00418_alextiara1.jpg)(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/alexandrac1893b.jpg)(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/marynecklacehang1w.jpg)

Princess Louise's wedding gift Fringe tiara. She's wearing it as a necklace. I'm not sure if the 2nd photo, of her daughter, Alexandra, is supposed to be the same tiara.
(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/prss20Louise2w.jpg)(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/alexfifew.jpg)

Queen Mary's (or the Hanoverian) fringe tiara: The diamonds of this tiara are from the property of King George III and were used in 1830 by Rundell to create a necklace. For Queen Victoria it was mounted on a frame, so that it could be worn as a tiara.
(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/england-22QueenMarysFringeTiara.jpg)[(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/queenmary4w.jpg)(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/177741w.jpg)(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/33262041.jpg)

Princess Mary's wedding gift Fringe tiara
(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/PcssMarysfringetiara1.jpg)(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/pmaryseatedGeorgeIIIDiamondFring-1.jpg)

Princess Marina's City of London fringe tiara. In 1934 this tiara was given to Princess Marina on behalf of the City of London, when she married the Duke of Kent. This tiara has also been worn by her daughter, Princess Alexandra and her daughter in law, Princess Michael
(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/england-11CityofLondonFringeTiara.jpg)(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/Pss_Marina1w.jpg)(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/MCKent21.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on August 15, 2006, 06:13:14 PM
Is it just me, or does the kokoshnik in the picture of Alexandra look like it's loose?  It looks like a cheap piece of tin-I wonder if it had to be fixed, because it looks quite solid, otherwise.

I can imagine that Elizabeth probably doesn't like wearing all that get up.  Tiaras probably get rather heavy after a while-I can only imagine how much of a headache you'd have, and she probably has to wear a lot of hair pins to keep it on.  Plus worrying about losing a necklace or brooch-eek! 

Still, I like to think that if I were queen, I'd run around the house in some of those necklaces.  Just for kicks.


ETA: Another nice thing about having a large collection of jewelry is that there's always something for everyone-depending on what you like, AND there's enough that every family member can benefit. 

And of course, the history behind a lot of the pieces is what makes them special in my view.  And the artwork. 
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: TampaBay on August 15, 2006, 09:02:11 PM
Princess Marina's City of London fringe tiara. In 1934 this tiara was given to Princess Marina on behalf of the City of London, when she married the Duke of Kent. This tiara has also been worn by her daughter, Princess Alexandra and her daughter in law, Princess Michael



I perfer it as a necklace but then again I am TampaBay.

Other than the grocery store, there are not many places to wear a tiara in Florida!   ;D ;D ;D

TampaBay
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on August 15, 2006, 10:00:28 PM
Unless you're in Fort Lauderdale, to the discos and gay bars?

:D

I have a few pieces of convertible costume jewelry that my grandmother gave to me-one is a necklace that has a detachable pendant that can be worn as a brooch.  My mother has some similiar ones-from the Sarah Coventry line from back in the 1970s.  Somehow, though, I doubt the Queen wears Sarah Coventry.



Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 15, 2006, 10:43:48 PM
Indeed !

I have also heard that Baby Bee who inheirited a Russian Fringe tiara (that belonged to her mother) sold it to the British Royal family sometime after their exile from Spain. I wonder if that is the one given to Princess Mary, Countess of Harewood. ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on August 15, 2006, 10:58:57 PM
Here is Marie Coburg's fringe

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/image929.jpg)

Here is Princess Mary's

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/PcssMarysfringetiara1.jpg)
(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/gbprmarytirm2.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 15, 2006, 11:06:39 PM
Could indeed possibly be. As Princess Mary's tiara did not have information on maker but "purchaed for her wedding".  ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on August 16, 2006, 02:33:22 AM
Indeed !

I have also heard that Baby Bee who inheirited a Russian Fringe tiara (that belonged to her mother) sold it to the British Royal family sometime after their exile from Spain. I wonder if that is the one given to Princess Mary, Countess of Harewood. ???
I always thought that it was another style of tiara that Baby Bee inherited and that Missy inherited the fringe tiara along with the pearls.The fringe tiara that Marie wore in so many photographs and in at least one of the de Laszlo portraits looks very like her mothers...Of course she may have bought it from her younger sister to help her out financially just as by buying the greek key tiara and cartier sapphire pendant helped out her sister Ducky.... :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 16, 2006, 03:29:29 AM
According to Baby Bee's family, she sold it to the British Royal Family to start up a charity (of course Missy could have 'borrowed" the tiara from time to time. Incidently, one of the few times Baby Bee wore her inheirance was at Missy's cornoation. There is a photo of her wearing the finge tiara posing with nieces Elisabetha and Mignion (and of course with Missy in the centre).  ;D
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: ChristineM on August 16, 2006, 04:26:37 AM
There was no 'sellf-off' of the Queen Mother's personal jewellery.   I don't know if her jewels were tax exempt.   Perhaps the Prince of Wales paid the enormous tax burden those gems represented.   I don't recall reading anything at the time.

Another way around tax inheritence - in the UK tax avoidance is legal:  tax evasion is a criminal offence - is to pass on cash and/or valuables seven years before death.  This calls for a certain amount of clairvoyance!

tsaria
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on August 16, 2006, 06:23:09 AM
Another mystery
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: ashdean on August 16, 2006, 06:36:29 AM
There was no 'sellf-off' of the Queen Mother's personal jewellery.   I don't know if her jewels were tax exempt.   Perhaps the Prince of Wales paid the enormous tax burden those gems represented.   I don't recall reading anything at the time.

Another way around tax inheritence - in the UK tax avoidance is legal:  tax evasion is a criminal offence - is to pass on cash and/or valuables seven years before death.  This calls for a certain amount of clairvoyance!

tsaria
There was no tax on the Queen Mothers estate,for the simple reason the Queen was the sole beneficary and there is no tax on gifts left to a sovereign by a sovereign.The old girl during her long life had had ample time to hand over her assets in whatever form to the others(Princess Margaret had received many gems in earlier years). The Queen in a diplomatic move to quieten any adverse comment kept the gems,the race horses and the more mundane items but gifted the pricipal works of art to the Royal Collection.As these included the most valuebal single item ( the Monet) and works by Augustus John,Pissarro,Fantin-Latour,Lowry,Nash and Romney amongst a host of others AND they are on display at Clarence House,Nobody could begin to complain... ;)
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: boffer on August 16, 2006, 07:15:39 AM
No one was charged inheritance tax on the estate of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, The Queen Mother because she officially left it all to the Queen, who then most probably will have been instructured who to give certain items to; therefore this avoids tax on everyones part since the Queen never pays inheritance tax, otherwise the royals wouldnt have the large collections.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on August 16, 2006, 07:21:12 AM
One of Princess Mary's Fringe Tiara's (see had two) was originally commisioned by Queen Mary, who then later gave it as a wedding gift to her daughter - she also had another wedding gift Fringe Tiara, one of these was sold to the Dukes of Westminster upon her death, and the others whereabouts is unknown.
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: Eddie_uk on August 16, 2006, 08:05:55 AM
the Queen never pays inheritance tax, otherwise the royals wouldnt have the large collections.

Yes thank goodness she doesn't have to, nor should she. It's so unfair. And it's tragic to see some lovely collections (such as in the case of the Duke of Gloucester) get divided up and go back out into the world.  :(
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: grandduchessella on August 16, 2006, 09:52:15 AM
The Gloucesters will be a real tragedy. The Duchess has so many pieces, most of them with long royal connections, and there's no way their children will be able to keep them all--nor would they really have any use for the bulk of them given their non-royal lives. Hopefully since there will still be a Dukedom, albeit a non-royal one, more pieces will be kept than in the situation of Pss Margaret's jewelry though.  :(
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: Eddie_uk on August 16, 2006, 10:14:11 AM
I sure hope so. It was sad to see all those things - personal gifts from QV, Beatrice - items belonging to Eddy, Helena etc all go under the hammer.  :'(
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: boffer on August 16, 2006, 11:50:20 AM
It could be the case, that to avoid such a sale that the Gloucesters will pass on the collections before their deaths and hopefully if they do this a long time before their deaths then they will avoid taxation. Although saying that, does anyone know why it was not sold at the time of Alice's death before it passed to the present duchess; i mean i know the fact that the duke was the only child ment the collection wasnt divided but why was it not sold to cover taxes then? Like pieces were when Priness Marina died?
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: ashdean on August 16, 2006, 11:54:41 AM
Rather off subject BUT......However sad.............IF great collections be it art or gems or whatever were not split up other collections would not be formed.In the case of great works of art..... also museums would not be able to aquire masterpieces for the public to enjoy
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: Eddie_uk on August 16, 2006, 12:12:04 PM
That's true ashdean. However I think it a shame when these old families and those who have walked hard and saved our taxed so heavily leaving no other option but to sell off their belongings, belongings that their ancestors may have collected and have been in the family for generations. In the case of new money people I should say it's enough to put them of working hard and saving if the goverment are the ones that will benefit.
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: ChristineM on August 16, 2006, 12:57:32 PM
How true Eddieboy.

Can't say I am all that upset about jewel collections being broken up.   Inheritance tax is payable after £285,000 - the value of a very average house.   In the last three years, estates falling into the inheritance tax net have risen by 300%.   

There is an even greater iniquity.   Home owners have to sell their homes in order to pay for their care in old age - something they spent their entire working lives paying for in taxes.   I cannot anticipate the Gloucesters, the Kents and so on having to sell the roof over their heads to receive the very modest and in many cases, very low standards of 'care' available to the elderly in today's UK.  I would not wish this to happen to any of them, but there is a terrible injustice here, and the breaking up a of tiara here, a necklace there and so on is hardly a tragedy and seems rather unimportant when laid alongside the realities of life.   It won't be long before the most many can expect to inherit will be granny's wedding ring.

As regards the Queen Mother's estate - the Queen Mother never was a monarch, rather a Queen consort - no reason to be exempt.   I understood it was the Prince of Wales who inherited his grandmother's moveable estate - witness the contents of Clarence House, Birkhall and the Castle of Mey and its contents - the latter now has been created a charitable trust in order to avoid taxes.   I am not certain, but I do recall reading in the, now lost, Windsor Jewels threads, that Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall is now sporting many of the late Queen Mother's jewels.

tsaria
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: boffer on August 16, 2006, 01:38:56 PM
It has been said from Buckingham Palace and Clarence House that the jewels that HRH The Duchess of Cornwall wears that once belonged to the Queen Mother, are loans from the Queen, and have not been given to HRH.

Also on the subject of Birkhall, that is on the Balmoral estate and is owned by the Queen, who allowed the Queen Mother the use of it, and after her death it still remained the property of the Queen and now is used by the Prince of Wales - as for Clarence House the contents of which is owned by the Queen, but since she has no need for it with a very large collection herself it has been left it Clarence House, the contents of Clarence House is enjoyed by The Prince of Wales and it is most likely that after Her Majesty inherited it then she transfered it into the Royal Collection, along with other pieces of furniture that also furnish Clarence House.

The Castle of Mey is now owned by a trust and the contents remains inside, although any of the items that belonged to the Royal Collection and were displayed at the Castle of Mey will have returned to the Royal Collection; either being re-housed or placed into storage. No-one inhertied anything from the Queen Mother other then the Queen, this was most probably to avoid taxation of their parts and the Queen Mother expressed what she would like to bequeath to whom; although it is most likely that the major pieces and bulk of her collection will have been transfered to the Royal Collection, or currently in the Queens Collection and will be transfered upon her death. But in reality it is all mere speculation as we will never know who was given what, and who was supposed to get what since royal wills never made public.
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: grandduchessella on August 16, 2006, 01:42:21 PM
Yes, Camilla has been spotted wearing several pieces, many of them pins. Didn't she wear the Boucheron tiara as well?

There is a constant battle in the US Congress regarding which the Democrats call 'estate' taxes and the Republicans call 'death' taxes. (Necessary for skewing polls as one sounds like it benefits the rich while the other sounds like every Average Joe takes the hit) Right now, I think it's estates over $1,000,000 that pay a certain percentage though that might just have been raised. Part of the argument is over leaving family businesses and farms which may be valued at more than $1 million even though that isn't cash but rather equity so taxes could force a sell-off.
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 16, 2006, 02:25:17 PM
IIRC, the arrangement that QEII came to with regards to her beginning to pay income tax including a proviso that she would not pay taxes on anything she would inherit from her mother. 

And the Duchess has worn the Boucheron tiara, but unfortunatley all we have to prove it is the picture taken through the rain-splattered limo window.  Drat. 

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/bouche1.jpg)

Does anyone think it likely that the jewels went to QEII in order that QEII would eventually place them in the category of 'Crown Jewellery'.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on August 16, 2006, 02:52:06 PM
According to "Tiaras: A History of Splendour", it seems that at least hundreds, maybe even thousands of fringe tiaras were created at the turn of the century-a very popular style.

Perhaps they could let Camilla wear one of the fringes then?  It seems she likes the Durbar tiara, what else could she wear?  The Strathmore Rose, maybe?
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: Eddie_uk on August 16, 2006, 03:03:57 PM

There is an even greater iniquity.   Home owners have to sell their homes in order to pay for their care in old age - something they spent their entire working lives paying for in taxes. 

Thank you Tsaria, so true. It's very unfair, why should they have to pay when they've paid all their lives?!!!
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 16, 2006, 03:29:36 PM
The three tiaras so far:

Boucheron Honeycomb - formerly worn by QEQM.
(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/bouche1.jpg)

Durbar - most closely associated with Queen Mary, but it was worn by QEQM at least once (South Africa).
(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/better2.jpg)

Family tiara - worn by the Duchess for her first wedding
(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/3337699.jpg)

and here at a state function at the palace.
(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/bigt.jpg)

In the great tiara hunt, anyone care to hazard a guess on which piece will be dusted off next?  Personally I think the big fenders are a mistake - it just adds to the big hair and it all ends up looking frightful.  The family piece looks much better IMO, so maybe the Strathmore Rose would be a good choice...
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on August 16, 2006, 03:42:03 PM
You can probably rule out the Cambridge Lover's Knot, since it's associated with Diana. 

I think the Boucheron would look a LOT better if it were maybe just one row, rather than three or four.  It's just too big and bulky-yuck.

Hmmm...isn't Queen Victoria's emerald tiara still around?  Or the Oriental Circlet?

I also think there are some of Maria Feodorovna's jewels still around-a sapphire and diamond tiara, I believe. 
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: Guinastasia on August 16, 2006, 03:43:37 PM
If the inheritance tax gets too great, I'd rather see them end up in a museum somewhere-as long as they're not broken down taken apart.

Or hey-give them back to the Crown-after all, William's and Harry's families will need jewels someday. 
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: boffer on August 16, 2006, 03:52:28 PM
Yes, either that or it will remain private property but will become the tradition that it will be worn by sucessive Princess of Wales and Queen Consorts since most of the jewels that came from the Queen Mother were either her pieces and linked to her being a Consort, and also many pieces from Alexandra and Mary which they were given as Princess of Wales. I think they will either become crown property or will be private but handed down as if they were crown property.

I mean we have to take not that although Camilla wears them it has been stated that they still belong to the Queen and are loans. I think the queen sees herself as custodian of the monarchy and its collections, and the Windsors have the largest collection of jewels in the world and i think she wants to keep it that way.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on August 16, 2006, 03:57:32 PM
There are many small tiaras that are sat in the vaults and worn once every decade so many she could have the use of one of these. Was it not said that at present no-one coul;d wear the Strathmore Rose because since it has been left unworn since the 1930's it is made of silver and this has so heavily tarnished that it is starting to decintergrate and therefore would need either resetting or extensive repairs otherwise the wear-er is at risk of either loosing some stones or it falling apart on their head. I personally think for HRH we need to see a change from all diamonds - does anyone know when the next state occassion HRH will be participating in where a tiara would be required attire? The next incomming state visit perhaps? (Or will she be wearing a tiara at Balmoral like HM usually does, TRH's ar indeed at Brikhall)?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 16, 2006, 04:00:57 PM


Oriental Circlet
(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/Kopie20220van20diamond3.jpg)

It seems that HM may be holding on to this one for her own use these days...she's only been waiting her whole reign to get it away from her mum...

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/qeiiindiancirclet.jpg)

Queen Victoria's emerald tiara (sighs deeply...) was sold some years ago, can't recall right now who did the dastardly deed, but they should be ashamed of themselves! 

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/emeraldtiaravictoria.jpg)


The Lover's Knot will almost certainly not appear until it shows up on the head of William's bride on their wedding day.  Nothing like some maudlin sentimentality to endear the girl to the public.  She'll be wreathed in orange blossom on the way toward the altar, and appear in the tiara after the ceremony, á la Fergie. 
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on August 16, 2006, 04:05:01 PM
Which tiara did Fergie wear to her reception-the Lover's Knot, or something else?
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: ChristineM on August 16, 2006, 04:36:09 PM
Some transparency would not go amiss.   Who decides what items form part of the Royal Collection and which are 'private'?   Touch of gamekeeper and poacher here.   The Queen Mother I am sure acquired significant furniture, paintings, objet d'art over the years.   She had a collection of Faberge as well as priceless porcelain.   It seems to me there is a huge loophole if it is possible for the Queen Mother to simply leave everything to the Queen who, lets face it, is hardly likely to strip Clarence House, Royal Lodge, Birkhall and the Castle of Mey of their treasures.   In actual fact, the Queen seldom, if ever, even visits these houses.

In the UK, ALL wills are public documents - always have been, long before the spurious 'Freedom of Information Act' - and as a result are open to public scrutiny.   Exceptions on this scale are only likely to flame republican aspirations.

In a nutshell, this is a family which already has been more than well endowed.    When it comes to the individual's civic responsibilities, they should be no different than the humblest of subjects.

tsaria
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: grandduchessella on August 16, 2006, 04:39:53 PM
This has been discussed before on the now (unfortunately) disappeared threads but it would be nice to see an official trust set up along the lines of the Danish royal jewelry collection. That protects many great historical pieces while still allowing various members of the family access to them. I know there are jewels that belong to the British Crown (separate from the Crown Jewels) but it would be nice to see it expanded to include more of the historical pieces. Queen Victoria was very smart in starting the collection considering how many pieces left to individuals have left the family. Of course, as Tsaria said, this pales in comparison to what happens to regular people, but for those of us who love royals and/or jewelry, it's sad nonetheless--especially since some items seem to have just disappeared. Plus they really do help make up the tapestry of the monarchy and as such should belong to the country.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on August 16, 2006, 04:43:59 PM
I love the Lover's Knot tiara--too bad it probably won't be seen for many years. Some of the smaller tiaras may pop up on Beatrice soon, I hope, if she begins to take more of a role--she's one of the few princesses the family has.

QV's emerald tiara falling off the face of the Earth is a crying shame.  :( It's one of my favorites. I still wish they'd try to finagle the Fife tiara away from the family so it could be seen again. Something that gorgeous shouldn't be collecting dust somewhere.
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: Guinastasia on August 16, 2006, 04:54:08 PM
It's not so much that I weep for the Windsors-surely they can afford the taxes and such.  I just don't like the idea of historical artifacts-which, let's face it, a great many of the Queen's jewels are-disappearing into obscurity.

Even if they can't hang on to them, put them in a museum where the entire country can enjoy them. 
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: ChristineM on August 16, 2006, 05:10:18 PM
I heartily agree, GrandduchessElla.   They should be in a repository to be withdrawn when the occasion demands.   When you look at the numnber of posts here wondering what has become of this tiara or of that necklace - some only come out for air once in a decade.   Some, apparently, never at all.   Given the Queen's lack of interest in jewellery, I would imagine she would be delighted with this compromise and there would be no risk of the collection being broken up.

This way, not only would the collection be maintained intact, the general public would be able to visit - as with the Crown Jewels - and see the beauty of the objects with their own eyes.   If they are well exhibited with photographs of the generations of wearers, how much richer, more interesting and accessible they would be than viewing in glossy, expensive - for many, unaffordable books like Geoffey Munn's absolutely brilliant tome on tiaras.   Then, of course, there would be the added advantage of the admission fees collected which could be used for the benefit of the nation as a whole.

tsaria
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 16, 2006, 05:32:41 PM
I thought that you were going to be the finagler GDella, or was it Tampa who was going to go trotting off to bag the Duke?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on August 16, 2006, 05:50:48 PM
That was me but I've messed up my elbow which will seriously hamper any breaking & entering. My feminine wiles are also rusty. TB was going to try to bag QV's Sapphire Tiara that went to Pss Mary.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on August 16, 2006, 06:22:58 PM
Was it not said that at present no-one coul;d wear the Strathmore Rose because since it has been left unworn since the 1930's it is made of silver and this has so heavily tarnished that it is starting to decintergrate and therefore would need either resetting or extensive repairs otherwise the wear-er is at risk of either loosing some stones or it falling apart on their head.

Wait-will too much tarnish cause a silver piece to fall apart?!?!  I ask because I own an antique silver handmirror that belonged to my great-great grandmother, and it's sitting in the cedar chest, wrapped up in cloth-and it's also very tarnished.  Should I get it out and clean it soon?

 :(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 16, 2006, 08:18:26 PM
I think the Strathmore Rose Tiara will suit Camilla much better than the high tower ones. The big ones will only do "a la Chignon", which I don't think the Duchess will like.  8)
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: Guinastasia on August 16, 2006, 10:23:56 PM
That's an EXCELLENT idea! 

Hey-another idea: to raise revenue, why not have an adjacent gift shop with paste and rhinestone replicas? 
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: grandduchessella on August 16, 2006, 10:43:06 PM
I'd be happier with postcards and a really great companion book full of photos and history of the jewels.  :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eddie_uk on August 17, 2006, 03:34:59 AM

Queen Victoria's emerald tiara (sighs deeply...) was sold some years ago, can't recall right now who did the dastardly deed, but they should be ashamed of themselves! 

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/emeraldtiaravictoria.jpg)


oh, what a shame :( that was definitly one that should have remaind in the collection or a museum. I suppose that when you are the actual owner, with goodness knows how many other tiaras, many with a fabulous history, it's not that big a deal :(

I believ QV lent it to Princess Victoria of Hesse at one time...
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 17, 2006, 03:40:19 AM
Yes...also went out was the Sapphire tiara (still with the HarewoodsI think !).  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ChristineM on August 17, 2006, 06:45:23 AM
Guinastasia - your antique silver mirror would do much better wrapped firstly in acid free tissue paper and then in a soft cloth.   I don't think there is much chance it is going to fragment.   Keeping it out of contact with air is ideal.   It is oxydisation which causes the tarnish.   

However, were I you, I would not keep it under wraps.   I would have it out on display to enjoy and polish it occasionally with a silver polish cloth.

tsaria
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: ChristineM on August 17, 2006, 06:51:40 AM
As was suggested to me, it would be possible to use the revenue raised by such an exhibition to purchase items already sold off from Queen Victoria's collection.   Then it really would be in with a chance of being restored intact.

I wonder if the British Royal Family have considered this idea.   Sadly, somehow I doubt this.   Or if they did, it was pretty quickly dismissed.

It would be wonderful if this heritage and beauty could be shared by all of us, rather than kept in some dark, distant vault.

tsaria
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on August 17, 2006, 07:34:32 AM
You can probably rule out the Cambridge Lover's Knot, since it's associated with Diana. 

I think the Boucheron would look a LOT better if it were maybe just one row, rather than three or four.  It's just too big and bulky-yuck.

Hmmm...isn't Queen Victoria's emerald tiara still around?  Or the Oriental Circlet?

I also think there are some of Maria Feodorovna's jewels still around-a sapphire and diamond tiara, I believe. 
.There was never a tiara from Marie Feodorevna in any of the British Royal's collections.In 1915 when the Dowager Empress decamped to Kiev from St Petersburg she took only a small part of her glittering collection with her.There was a war on and no need for lavish gems,so Kiki (Mlle Greenveld,the danish chief dresser) packed various "everyday" items ,pearls,brooches,bracelets etc.Marie never returned To St P, but in the early days of the revolution tried via her grandson in law Felix Youssoupoff to try to recover them.He was too late they had already been taken to Moscow.In 1929 when that salvaged part of the  collection was sold in London, the few of the 77 items listedthat were sold (mainly pearls and sapphires did not include even the most modest circlet)So the sapphire tiara is of unknown and no doubt less illustrious origins.As for the Oriental circlet it is a crown jewel and not the personal property of the Queen.Camilla will have the chance to wear it in the future when her husband is monarch.... ;)
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 17, 2006, 09:01:33 AM
 
 to raise revenue, why not have an adjacent gift shop with paste and rhinestone replicas? 

Surely you can't be serious!  :o   It's bad enough that there are ads in Majesty magazine selling replicas of the Ladies of India necklace with some 'matching' earrings.  It's truly hideous to see. 
Selling kitschy replicas would be a huge mistake, it would erode the power of the jewels if every tourist could buy a copy and wear it to the company Christmas party.   
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: boffer on August 17, 2006, 09:14:44 AM
Royal wills are the only ones to not be made public; it has been a tradition that their wills are held from the public domain - this has been the case since the Will of Queen mary's brother was made leaving the Cambridge Emeralds to his mistress, highlighting the public scandel. Since then all wills have been made private, i was listening to an interesting programme about this whole concept recently on BBC website; sadly i cannot currently find the link.
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 17, 2006, 09:31:05 AM
I heard the same programme, Boffer. It was on Radio4 but I think it is too late for "Listen again"  feature.
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: Guinastasia on August 17, 2006, 09:49:49 AM
 
 to raise revenue, why not have an adjacent gift shop with paste and rhinestone replicas? 

Surely you can't be serious!  :o   It's bad enough that there are ads in Majesty magazine selling replicas of the Ladies of India necklace with some 'matching' earrings.  It's truly hideous to see. 
Selling kitschy replicas would be a huge mistake, it would erode the power of the jewels if every tourist could buy a copy and wear it to the company Christmas party.   

I was half-kidding.  Maybe little miniature brooches or what have you.  Other than that, books, postcards, that sort of thing. 
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 17, 2006, 09:56:50 AM
Why not ? Other museums do the same thing. I do not think it is intended to fool anybody. Besides, most of that stuff is pretty ugly for the office christmas party.
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 17, 2006, 10:18:57 AM
Well, in order for the selling of the replicas to be viable, wouldn't the quality of the reproductions have to suffer?  I'll post a pic of the Majesty ad to give you an idea of what I mean.  In addition to the Ladies of India necklace, they also offer Queen Victoria's collet necklace and matching drop earrings.  It makes me shudder.
Museums offering reproductions from their collections is somewhat different.  Unless loaned to an exhibition, the items would not be part of a collection that is still in use, the way that HM's jewels are. 
It could get out of hand so easily - the Franklin mint or Ivana Trump could get involved, and then we would all be in big trouble!   :D
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 17, 2006, 10:25:50 AM
From the Majesty magazine website:

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/durb.jpg)(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/coll.jpg)

You wouldn't really want to see what they might do to the crown rubies, would you?

Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: Guinastasia on August 17, 2006, 10:39:30 AM
Meh, I think most of that stuff is just for fun and giggles.

At one point, the Franklin Mint (yes, I know, I got their Titanic doll, okay?) had miniature replicas of various royal tiaras-they weren't that bad. 

Besides, it's not like this is anything new-according to the Fields book, the Prince Albert brooch was reproduced on a massive scale very cheaply, and some of the Jubilee memoribilia from Victoria's time was hideous-bustles that played "God Save the Queen" when one sat down?

Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 17, 2006, 10:48:02 AM
I'm not trying to be elitist, and maybe it's foolish, but the thought of these things showing up at the dollar store horrifies me; ironically, I think the "God Save the Queen" bustle sounds like a hoot.  A Victorian whoopee cushion. 

I'm a living contradiction.   :-\
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on August 17, 2006, 10:48:18 AM
Guinastasia - your antique silver mirror would do much better wrapped firstly in acid free tissue paper and then in a soft cloth.   I don't think there is much chance it is going to fragment.   Keeping it out of contact with air is ideal.   It is oxydisation which causes the tarnish.   

However, were I you, I would not keep it under wraps.   I would have it out on display to enjoy and polish it occasionally with a silver polish cloth.

tsaria

Acid free tissue paper?  Where can one get some-is that just basic tissue paper you buy at Hallmark or a craft store?

I'd love to have it out on display, but I happen to have six cats-there's no where I could put it for now where I wouldn't fear it being knocked to the floor.  Someday, maybe, but not right now. 

Thanks.


ETA:  According to the Fields book, a "small V-shaped tiara with a large centre sapphire had also belonged to the Empress.  Queen Mary left the tiara to Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother who has never worn it in public, but loaned it to Princess Margaret for a number of years." 

It's on the page with the pearl choker with the large sapphire clasp.
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: CHRISinUSA on August 17, 2006, 11:00:20 AM
As was suggested to me, it would be possible to use the revenue raised by such an exhibition to purchase items already sold off from Queen Victoria's collection.   Then it really would be in with a chance of being restored intact.  I wonder if the British Royal Family have considered this idea.   Sadly, somehow I doubt this.   Or if they did, it was pretty quickly dismissed.  It would be wonderful if this heritage and beauty could be shared by all of us, rather than kept in some dark, distant vault.

tsaria

Unless her tax exemption ended, or she was forced to do so by some government intervention, why on earth would the Queen want to hand over her private jewels to a museum, a trust or some other state regulated body?  Those private jewels are a sizable part of her private fortune - handed down by her ancestors over centuries.

The Queen's private liquid wealth is grossly insufficient to support her family in their lifestyle.  Most of her wealth is held in hard assets like jewels, art, furnishings, and property.  Let's face it.  Were a repubilican United States of Great Britain and Northern Ireland formed today (shudder), the "ex" Queen would have to sell Balmoral (it doesn't turn profit), retire to Sandringham, and sell off some of her private jewels, art and other belongings to maintain her family in the manner to which they are accustomed.  

If I were in her shoes, I'd be stockpiling every possible private asset I had as an insurance policy against such a future possibility.
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 17, 2006, 11:09:45 AM
I was referring to museum quality reproductions of historical or unique design pieces. Not the Majesty stuff. I have a few pievces myself and gave some away to friends as presents- friends who knew what they are and appreciated their history.
 FRANKLIN MINT ! [ok- I admit to having the Diana Wedding  doll, before I knew any better-shame].
 I have seen some of the Queen's bow  brooches reproduced, though. Not sure where or whether or not they were authorised.
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: Eddie_uk on August 17, 2006, 11:13:43 AM
Yes I saw some bow brooches under the counter in the gift shop at Sandringham. Now, you know me, never opinionated!! but I thought they looked rather tacky.
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 17, 2006, 11:20:19 AM
I was referring to museum quality reproductions of historical or unique design pieces.


Well, that's a whole other ballgame, innit? 
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on August 17, 2006, 11:32:56 AM
This is when I wish we had the old threads. On one of the many separate jewel sections, I think it was stated (pretty adamantly) that the Fields book was incorrect on the provenance of that tiara. There was a list of the jewels sold after the Dowager Empresses death--and not just to the British RF--and there was no mention of such a tiara in the inventory.
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: grandduchessella on August 17, 2006, 11:40:14 AM
Many monarchs have passed on pieces of jewelry to the Crown--starting with QV who listed such items as the Kent amethyst demi-parure shown on one of the prior pages. The Queen wouldn't have to do it with all her jewelry--but maybe some of the bigger pieces, like the Delhi Durbar, which has only been seen once (recently, on Camilla) in decades. There are some items that, unless they are broken up, are just too ornate and old-fashioned to be worn anymore. They could always be 'borrowed' back to wear but kept around rather than sold-off. It seems to work well for the Danes. They have a large amount of personal property but also some large sets that belong to the Crown which prevents them from being sold off. This might work especially well with the State gifts--much as EII asked that the proceeds from sales of those items in the recent Pss Margaret auction be given to charity rather than personally pocketed.
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: grandduchessella on August 17, 2006, 11:43:46 AM
As regards royal wills and the Francis of Teck situation, his will set a legal precedent when it was sealed, possibly to avoid the scandal over leaving such a large part of his family's legacy to his (married) mistress. The document remains a secret and the precedent has been used in the case of subsequent royal wills.

Here is the site of the program that talks about it:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/document/document_20050829.shtml

Here's some info on the estate of the Queen Mother from a palace press release:

"Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother has bequeathed her entire estate (which mainly comprises the contents of her houses) to The Queen.

In her will, she asked The Queen to make certain bequests to members of her staff, and these bequests will be subject to Inheritance Tax in the normal way.

The Queen has decided that the most important of Queen Elizabeth's pictures and works of art should be transferred to the Royal Collection.

Some of these items, including works by Monet, Nash and Carl Fabergé, from Queen Elizabeth's collection will be on display in the 'Royal Treasures' exhibition, which is due to open at the new Queen's Gallery, Buckingham Palace, on 22 May.

It is expected that The Prince of Wales will move from St James's Palace to Clarence House, which will become The Prince of Wales's office and official London residence. "

The BBC announced that her estate was worth an estimated £70m
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 17, 2006, 11:54:53 AM
Good work GDElla ! I started to look it up, but became distracted. I knew it was too late for "listen again" but thought there would be a print version around in the archives.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on August 17, 2006, 11:59:58 AM
It has been suggested that Field was mis-informned and it was only the centre Sapphire that came from Empress M-F's sale; not the entire tiara.
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: grandduchessella on August 17, 2006, 12:19:37 PM
I went back and looked after you said that--I had the site saved--and apparently you can't listen.  :(

I did find some information on the series though:

"Dying of pneumonia is always a hazard when taking holidays in Scotland, but when Prince Francis of Teck, the brother of Queen Mary, keeled over at Balmoral a hundred years ago, his death threatened a bit of a scandal. In Document (8pm, Monday, Radio 4), Mike Thomson investigated how his will, sealed by Queen Mary, hushed up gossip....and ushered in a century of royal secrecy. Unlike most wills, which are public documents, the will of a monarch is private " this is why we have no idea of the extent of the Queen Mother's wealth. The privilege dates back to Prince Francis, a legendary womaniser, whose infatuation with the married Lady Kilmorey was an absorbing tale of scandal, including rumours of an illegitimate child. Standard fare for the Royal family now, of course, but back then the Royals had different ideas about serving as a soap opera for national titillation, and Queen Mary made legal history by insisting that her brother's will be sealed. The idea behind this series is inspired. Thomson doggedly follows a paper trail to illuminate how information is still denied us, even with the Freedom of Information Act....In this instance, he rooted out a draft copy of the will in Belfast, which revealed that Prince Frank had given his married consort the family's precious Cambridge Emeralds, originally won in a lottery by the son of George IV. The outraged Queen Mary was obliged to buy them back from Lady Kilmorey, who, it also emerged, had been a busy woman, being placed in the famous 'loose box' of mistresses in Westminster Abbey at Edward VII's coronation and possibly bearing him a child." From The Independent 8/31/2005

I had posted a lot about it at the time but now that info is gone.  :(

If I can remember correctly, there's a draft copy of the will the reporter got access to. There were also papers which laid out the amount of money that QM paid to get the emeralds back--albeit with a lot of coercion.



Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 17, 2006, 12:34:04 PM
Yes, you can the the pictures- including the will- on the current archive site. Of course this is neat, as one could not see them on the Radio4 broadcast!
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on August 17, 2006, 12:41:01 PM
As stated earlier Fields book although interesting has a number of mistakes. There are however far more in Ms Menkes book !!! ;)
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: Guinastasia on August 17, 2006, 12:47:22 PM
Exactly.  I mean, we're lamenting in the Jewels thread that Queen Victoria's beautiful emerald tiara was sold off and now it's whereabouts are unknown.  Such things ARE historical artifacts, and shouldn't be lost to the auction block.

Not all of her private collection, mind you.  There are always going to be pieces that one should keep for oneself.  But, things like Albert's brooch, the Kent demi-parure, Victoria's jubilee necklace, etc. 

I believe that recently, Queen Marie-Amelie of France's beautiful diamond, sapphire and pearl parure was auctioned off by Sotheby's.  Shouldn't something like that be in a museum, where it can be appreciated?

And of course, members of the family can always borrow pieces from it for special occassions and what not.  But otherwise, why not have these beautiful items where everyone can appreciate them, rather than locked away in some safe, gathering dust for decades?
Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 17, 2006, 12:53:45 PM
In the case of M-A necklace, was that part of what was left of the late Count of Paris' estate ? I think that was sold out of neccesity.  If no museum bought it, it was up for grabs.They need the money, in other words.
 I do not think the Windsors are in that category of need.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on August 17, 2006, 12:57:45 PM
Ah, gotcha.  Oh well, I really got it for the pictures.

What about the sapphire and diamond tiara that the Queen had made to match the sapphire set that her father gave her for her wedding present?

Title: Re: taxes or fees on jewels
Post by: Guinastasia on August 17, 2006, 01:08:33 PM
Oh, absolutely, I can understand people needing money-I just think it's sad when things like these don't end up in museums, or worse-broken up for the stones. 

Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 17, 2006, 01:46:48 PM
You mean this prime example of an escapee from the 'upside down necklace hall of shame'?

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/sapp1.jpg)

Yech.  The argument has been made in the past that this tiara is perfectly suitable because even though it is a piece that was made in the 20th century, it melds well with the sapphire demi-parure that it was meant to complement, and I suppose that that is true.  However, I still don't like it and you can't make me.   (sticks out tongue)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on August 17, 2006, 02:05:38 PM
Maybe that's another one for Camilla.

I think the Boucheron wouldn't be bad if it were reworked.  Maybe just make two tiers, and have it made with smaller stones-more delicate and lace-like.

Oh, and does anyone else think that the Lover's Knot tiara should have the pearl spikes put back?  I think it looks unfinished without them.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: TampaBay on August 17, 2006, 06:16:16 PM
You mean this prime example of an escapee from the 'upside down necklace hall of shame'?

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/sapp1.jpg)

Yech.  The argument has been made in the past that this tiara is perfectly suitable because even though it is a piece that was made in the 20th century, it melds well with the sapphire demi-parure that it was meant to complement, and I suppose that that is true.  However, I still don't like it and you can't make me.   (sticks out tongue)

Well I would wear it.  I  ever met a sapphire I did not like!  ;D ;D

TampaBay
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on August 17, 2006, 08:58:57 PM
Same here.  Sapphires rock. 
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 17, 2006, 10:47:29 PM
And it suits Camilla too...I think eventuially she'll get it.  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: B5218 on August 18, 2006, 09:00:54 PM
What has become of Magnolia's web site  ??? ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on August 18, 2006, 09:42:44 PM
I know it went down once after disagreements on the RJOTW board regarding copyright and issues people had over use of the photos they scanned and what-not. I thought it was back up though. Did it disappear again?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 18, 2006, 09:53:07 PM
Haven't seen it... ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: TampaBay on August 19, 2006, 07:16:01 AM
And it suits Camilla too...I think eventuially she'll get it.  ;)

NO!!!  The Duchess of Dermount is going to get it!!! One way or another.

TampaBay
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 19, 2006, 11:57:40 AM
Who is the Duchess of Demont ?  ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 19, 2006, 12:29:07 PM
aka Tampa Bay Train Wreck
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on August 19, 2006, 12:54:22 PM
I know it went down once after disagreements on the RJOTW board regarding copyright and issues people had over use of the photos they scanned and what-not. I thought it was back up though. Did it disappear again?

Yes. Now all that comes up is a screen that says it is not available.  It gives the impression of having been shut down by the server. (is that the correct term?)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: TampaBay on August 19, 2006, 03:50:39 PM
aka Tampa Bay Train Wreck

aks THE TampaBay Train Wreck Creature!!!
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on August 19, 2006, 03:53:03 PM
I have found a picture of Her Majtesy wearing the mystery earrings that she worn the Godman necklace in 2004; she is also wearing the diamond and cabochon emerald tassel necklace and a cambridge brooch - and the apperance of H.M indicates that these are not that new pieces and therefore they could have been around for a while in the vaults.

(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/eb16fd40.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on August 20, 2006, 04:15:48 AM
The earrings are in the list of CROWN JEWELS from Queen Victoria's day...The brooch is from the Cambridge emeralds :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on August 20, 2006, 08:29:56 AM
No, Her Majesty usually wears Queen Victoria's Fringe earrings with the godman necklace - however for the 2004 french visit at windsor she wore different earrings and these are those earring - there was a discussion about them on one of the previous threads.

QV's Frine Earrings
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/QueenElizabeth-QueenVictoriasfringe.jpg)
QEII's Mystery earrings
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/QueenElizabeth-EntenteCordinalDi-1.jpg)

You can see that they are definately different - and the mystery earrings are the ones worn in my previous post.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 20, 2006, 08:21:42 PM
I just love coborourn emeralds ;) !
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: B5218 on August 22, 2006, 09:48:57 PM
Are these photos all of the same piece?
Photo 1 doesn't have the dangling bits the the others do.
Photo 2 and 4 look the same.
Photo 3 looks like some diamond drops have been added. 

(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4/B5218/842a019b.jpg)
(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4/B5218/332408cf.jpg)
(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4/B5218/AlexandraCollar251.jpg)
(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4/B5218/Alexandracollar250.jpg)

Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 22, 2006, 10:13:10 PM
Yes I think it is was same piece. Looks a bit showgirkish now (Sanbra Bulllocks in Miss Congenity 2).  ;D
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on August 25, 2006, 04:49:18 PM
It has always been stated when ever the Vladimir tiara is duscussed what it would look like with diamonds:

I have attempted, although i do apologise for the poor quality.

Diamonds
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/Jewels-ValdimirTiaramyversionwothdi.jpg)
Sapphire and Diamond Clusters
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/7482f328.jpg)
Ruby and Diamond Clusters
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/c4757221.jpg)

And of course the forms we know it in:

Pearls
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/Jewels-ValdimirTiarawithpearls-1.jpg)
Cambridge Emeralds
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/Jewels-ValdimirTiarawithcambridg-1.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on August 25, 2006, 07:30:00 PM
I like it with the diamonds.  :) It's somewhat reminscent of my favorite tiara, the Fife tiara, with the swinging diamonds.

I don't like the sapphires and rubies so much (but of course they'd look different in reality) but they're still an improvement on the sapphire and ruby tiaras the Queen presently wears.  :P
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on August 25, 2006, 08:34:38 PM
Or what about without any of the hanging drops.  OR...alternate-one pearl, one emerald, etc.

 ;D

Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 25, 2006, 09:12:16 PM
It would look like she is wearing a xmas tree !
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on August 25, 2006, 09:29:42 PM
Ah, good point.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 25, 2006, 11:50:56 PM
Indeed ! I like the pearl drops the best.  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on August 26, 2006, 02:21:57 AM
It has always been stated when ever the Vladimir tiara is duscussed what it would look like with diamonds:

I have attempted, although i do apologise for the poor quality.

Diamonds
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/Jewels-ValdimirTiaramyversionwothdi.jpg)
S
Cartier made Princess Paley an all diamond version in about 1909,it didn't have as many arches but also could be worn as a corsage ornament. A version of alternate diamonds and pearls was made for Nancy Leeds (later Princess of Greece).But it was very ugly in comparison to the others.....Cannot understand why the Queen did not have amethys drops made to complement the Kent/crown demi parure....tBoffer you made a great job with the pics....
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on August 26, 2006, 05:07:17 AM
I quickly tried to see what a Amethyst version would look like:

(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/6361cbc0.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on August 26, 2006, 05:37:15 AM
And just incase Her Majesty decides that she doesnt want to where the brazilian tiara (which i happen to like, much better to see in person).

An Aquamarine drop tiara:
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/f6b9cea1.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on August 26, 2006, 08:18:15 AM
I quickly tried to see what a Amethyst version would look like:

(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/6361cbc0.jpg)
VERY NICE WORK,BOFFER,THANKYOU. ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ChristineM on August 26, 2006, 10:53:45 AM
Thank you Boffer for these lovely, versatile, variations.   

My preference is for your 'diamond' version and, of course, the pearls.

tsaria
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 27, 2006, 08:34:36 AM
Yes...it looks like an ice cream pie with different toppings. ;D
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Emperor of the Dominions on August 27, 2006, 09:04:15 PM
Love the new adaptations to the Vladimir Tiara, particularly the Diamond, Aquamarine and Amythest variations. Maybe we should e-mail Her Majesty and suggest it as something to mark the Diamond Jubilee? I'm sure there are boxes of suitable lose stones gathering dust in the vaults.

I also wonder what the Queen would like wearing Queen Victoria's small diamond Crown? I believe the last one to have worn it was Queen Alexander.

R.I.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 27, 2006, 09:07:40 PM
I agree...It is time the Queen wore that one instead of the wedding cake (Imperial State Crown). It is too much to ask for a 80 year old lady to carry so much weight ! Queen Victoria loved the little crown and it would be nice to see it worn by a queen again !  :D :D :D
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on August 30, 2006, 05:15:31 PM
Im sorry of the bad job i did here, but i though i would try and have a little idea of how the small crown would suit her majesty:

(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/QueenElizabeth-smallcrown.jpg)

I happen to think it would look odd, possible just because we are so used to seeing the huge crown on her head.

i do apoligise for the bad job i have done here.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 30, 2006, 05:17:55 PM
It does sort of look like something from Monty Python...LOL...
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 30, 2006, 08:23:17 PM
I think it is just the cut and paste that made it look odd. Remember both Queen Victoria and Queen Alexandra wore it with a veil. It looked more elegant that way. I really believe it is time Her Majestty took the huge load off her head. The little crown would be much more comfortable as both QV and QA loved it.  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on August 31, 2006, 06:49:57 AM
I heard somewhere that Queen Mary also wore it once or twice (although i have never seen any pictures) and that it was only placed in the jewel house in 1936 when George V died, and it has not been worn since.

Even if it is not worn again; it is a shame that the present royal family do not like balls and other such occassions like Queen Victoria used to do; because Her Majesty could indeed look just like Victoria if it was a victorian theme, afterall she still owns many of her jewels and no doubt her dresses are in the kensington collection - that would indeed be a sight.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 31, 2006, 10:19:30 AM
Agreed ! I just think the crown will be much lighter than the one she wore...it is quite a load for an 80 year old woman.  :(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: nelly on August 31, 2006, 10:38:13 PM
Yes, I always have liked that little crown, but somehow I cannot visualize QM wearing it.  I think if the Queen had her hairstyle changed to accomodate it, it would look nicely--but let's face it, unless for brides, vails have not been in fashion for some time so I cannot see HM wearing one.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on August 31, 2006, 11:07:46 PM
If HM wanted to do it will be done. Hope it will happen soon... ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eddie_uk on September 01, 2006, 05:10:32 AM
The Queen looks very nice with a black veil when visiting the pope, very glamorous.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 01, 2006, 05:12:27 AM
indeed...a veil at her age added grandeur. With the Queen Mum gone, she could take the mantle as the nation's granny.  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: TampaBay on September 01, 2006, 08:24:37 PM
This thread is getting heavy!!!  Timefor GD Ella to start a new one!!!


TampaBay
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 01, 2006, 08:33:00 PM
You think so ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on September 02, 2006, 04:18:32 PM
I was wondering if someone could please provide me with pictures and information of Queen Elizabeth's bracelets:
1) The diamond braclets worn by queen victoria, and Queen Mary, consisting of diamond strap and i believe one has a miniture of prince albert in its centre.

2)Queen Mary's Indian diamond bangles that were given as a wedding gift to the queen in 1947.
 
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eddie_uk on September 02, 2006, 04:36:38 PM
Queen Victorias pearl bracelet with the portrait of Prince Albert at the centre was buried (?!) with her. She never took it off and she can be seen wearing it in many pictures.  :). I don't know if that's the same one.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on September 02, 2006, 05:35:18 PM
Sorry i was refereing to these bracelets that Queen mary often wore with diamonds, can you tel me more about these please?

I know that she wore then to her coronation and are similar to ones once owned by Queen Charlotte. I though these were left to the crown by Victoria.

(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/bd34c49e.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 02, 2006, 08:10:34 PM
I wonder did HM wore them ?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Taren on September 07, 2006, 09:27:45 PM
For those in the United States (or wherever they sell People Magazine I guess) People has a royals edition out. I flipped through it today, thinking it was going to be tabloid garbage, but it actually looked very nice. In particular, there were several gorgeous pictures of jewels. I would have gotten it today, had it not been $11. From what I could tell it was definitely worth that much though.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 07, 2006, 09:35:04 PM
Thanks for the tip...Will go out and seek it.  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on September 07, 2006, 09:49:14 PM
For those in the United States (or wherever they sell People Magazine I guess) People has a royals edition out. I flipped through it today, thinking it was going to be tabloid garbage, but it actually looked very nice. In particular, there were several gorgeous pictures of jewels. I would have gotten it today, had it not been $11. From what I could tell it was definitely worth that much though.

There was an ad for it in the last edition, with Jessica Simpson on the cover. It looked really good. I was surprised.  :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 07, 2006, 09:54:28 PM
You like Jessica Simpson ?  ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on September 07, 2006, 10:00:23 PM
No, I like People magazine. I was just stating where people could see an ad for the royalty book. I don't like or dislike Jessica Simpson.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 07, 2006, 10:03:12 PM
Was it a special issue of people and not the regular one right ?  ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on September 07, 2006, 10:08:54 PM
The one with the ad (the Jessica Simpson cover) is a regular issue. The ad shows pictures of the royal edition. The actual royal edition is a special one that is sold separately and for a higher price than the regular magazine price. Bottom line, if you see the Simpson cover, you can flip through it to see what the ad for the royal one looks like. I hadn't heard about it before so I was very surprised when I was flipping through my issue (I have a subscription) and saw the ad.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on September 07, 2006, 10:33:20 PM
Rummaged around for my issue. Here's the ad:

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/image449.jpg)

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/image450.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Taren on September 08, 2006, 12:24:37 AM
Thanks so much for posting the pictures! The issue was really quite thick -definitely larger than a normal issues, but not quite Vogue sized. Did your magazine say anything about it being only available for the week or will it be around longer?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 08, 2006, 01:49:10 AM
Will definitely look for it !  ;D
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on September 08, 2006, 10:20:17 AM
It didn't say--just 'on sale now'. These special issues tend to hang around awhile rather than just the week that the regular issues do. I think People already has one out, on celebrity style or something, that's been around awhile. They usually last until the store runs out of them. I'm going to the bookstore today for my weekly pile of magazines so I'm going to look for it then.  :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on September 08, 2006, 12:56:25 PM
OFF SUBJECT I KNOW....But who is Jessica Simpson ?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on September 08, 2006, 01:47:33 PM
She's an American pop singer/reality star/fashionista/tabloid regular. She had a show on MTV, Newlyweds, which chronicled her first few years of marriage to fellow pop singer Nick Lachey. They are now divorced but the tabloids can't get enough.

I checked out the People special on the royals and was 'eh' about it. I was pretty disappointed. There were only a few pages of not very crisp photos on the jewels of EII--all of which are better reproduced here on the Forum--which is what interested me. (I guess I'll still have to order the catalog) It mostly covered British (natch) and Monagasque royals. It broke down into fashion (Diana, Grace, Queen Rania, Caroline, etc), royal weddings (the earliest was EII & Philip and there are only 2 or 3 non-British, Grace & Rainier being one), the Charles/Diana/Camilla triangle, young royals (William, Harry, etc) and some pictures of the homes, like Sandringham (again, nothing special). It seemed to be a compilation of pictures People has published before with VERY little text or real historical relevance.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Robert_Hall on September 08, 2006, 01:59:46 PM
Sounds like a "no sale" to me.  I did not really expect much more from People anyway. The Vogue royalty issue was at least classy.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 08, 2006, 08:38:29 PM
My favoutite was the "Vanity Fair" Royal issue 3 years ago. Stylish and attractive.  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Robert_Hall on September 08, 2006, 10:20:07 PM
The Vanity Fair is what I meant, Eric. Thanks for reminding me, and I have several copies of the issue!
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on September 09, 2006, 02:16:09 AM
She's an American pop singer/reality star/fashionista/tabloid regular. She had a show on MTV, Newlyweds, which chronicled her first few years of marriage to fellow pop singer Nick Lachey. They are now divorced but the tabloids can't get enough.
THANKYOU GRANDDUCHESS, the lady has not hit England yet !!!!! Anyway we have the Horrid Mrs Beckham !!
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: TampaBay on September 09, 2006, 06:26:45 AM
The Vanity Fair is what I meant, Eric. Thanks for reminding me, and I have several copies of the issue!

Vanity Fair is a magazine for know how to read, choose to do so and not just look at pictures!   ;D ;D ;D

TampaBay
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 09, 2006, 10:47:12 AM
But such stylish photos !  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on September 13, 2006, 03:24:21 PM
Question-are there any pictures out there of Princess Alice wearing her meander tiara, the one Princess Anne has inherited? 
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on September 13, 2006, 08:04:03 PM
(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/ENG20Greek20Key.jpg)
(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/521050261.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 13, 2006, 09:46:47 PM
Loved that tiara...One of my favourites.  ;D
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on September 13, 2006, 11:58:26 PM
Thank you!
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 14, 2006, 03:49:37 AM
Now you see it...now you don't ?  ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Emperor of the Dominions on September 19, 2006, 06:14:25 PM
Came upon this website and I'd thought I'd post the link for any of you who wish to buy their own copy of the State Diadem, Vladimir Tiara etc. Enjoy...

R.I.

http://www.stagejewellery.com/crowns1.htm
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 19, 2006, 09:04:42 PM
I think the beauty contest crown looked the best ! Hehehehe... ;D

Seriously... I think the Cambridge lovers-knot is my favourite.  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on September 20, 2006, 10:44:43 AM
Thanks for that link emperor...it was very 'interesting'.  (shudders)

The words 'inspired by' have never made me more terrified. ;D
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Taren on September 20, 2006, 12:23:17 PM
Oh my...and if you click on accessories you can have your very own copy of George V or George VI's royal orders for the low low price of 30 pounds. The kokoshnik frightened me. It looks more like a fence than any kokoshnik tiara I've ever seen. It's funny, looking at these fake pieces on the site. I kept wondering if Queen Alexandra, with her love for costume jewelry, would have liked any of them.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Robert_Hall on September 20, 2006, 02:49:03 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/5361174.stm
This is a 1962 picture pf Princess Margaret in the bathtub, wearing a tiara ! Photographed by her then husband. Lord Snowdon. My question is- was this a REAL piece of jewelry?
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v289/Markhall/Alex-23.jpg)
 You need to enlarge it or go to the BBC site to see it more clearly.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on September 20, 2006, 02:56:12 PM

It's real alright, it's the Poltimore.

Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Robert_Hall on September 20, 2006, 03:01:51 PM
That is what I thought, but I am no expert. What a way to have a bath !
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on September 20, 2006, 03:21:34 PM

Indeed, it's the only way to bathe.  Unfortunately, the tiara I wear in the tub is made out of a tin foil pie plate with multi-coloured sequins glued to it.   :(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Robert_Hall on September 20, 2006, 03:22:43 PM
Lokks like a good way to keep the hair up & "done" before dressing for the gala evening.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Kimberly on September 20, 2006, 03:52:51 PM
Sorry to go a little o/t but I think that the original photograph of Margaret in the bath has just been put up for auction :o
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Robert_Hall on September 20, 2006, 04:01:38 PM
It is actually for sale, and a photgraphic exhibit by Lord Snowdon at a West End Gallery. I think the price is 2,000 pounds. The BBC lonk gives the details.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on September 20, 2006, 07:08:51 PM
Oh my...and if you click on accessories you can have your very own copy of George V or George VI's royal orders for the low low price of 30 pounds. The kokoshnik frightened me. It looks more like a fence than any kokoshnik tiara I've ever seen. It's funny, looking at these fake pieces on the site. I kept wondering if Queen Alexandra, with her love for costume jewelry, would have liked any of them.

It's pretty hit or miss.  The kokoshnik is absolutely hideous, but the George IV State Diadem is dead-on.  The Vladimir is all right, and the Lover's Knot isn't bad.

I too like the "Beauty Contest" tiara-it looks like Tsarina Alexandra's tiara. 

However, the Spencer and Girls of Britain and Ireland are waaaaay off.


But I guess I just ADORE big, gaudy sparkly costume jewelry-just for fun. 


Also, note, it's called "stage jewelry".  I think it's mostly for plays and the like. 


Oh, and off topic, but if you want to see some really pretty antique style jewelry, go here (http://jbaileystore.com/).

And here (http://www.titanic-jewelry.com/) is her Titanic collection. 

I don't know if I mentioned this before, but I once found a picture of a necklace that belonged to the Empress Eugenie that was EXACTLY like the "Heart of the Ocean" necklace.


ETA: I myself wouldn't mind finding a copy of the "Albert brooch"-the sapphire with the surrounding diamonds.  Something like that would be easy to immitate without looking cheap-just like you see so many rings that look like Diana's engagment ring.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 20, 2006, 11:34:31 PM
I love sapphire jewelry they are so undestated.

Love the Albert brooch, Diana's erngagement ring and her sapphire choker.  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Taren on September 21, 2006, 12:13:29 AM
Sapphires weren't really used very much in royal jewelry prior to Prince Albert giving Queen Victoria gifts of sapphires, right? I suppose that's yet another reason to like him. I'm with you, Eric -those pieces are all favorites of mine.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 21, 2006, 03:32:23 AM
Glad you like them too...It worked with Diana because she had blue eyes too. The blue and the blond palette is very attractive.  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on September 21, 2006, 03:30:31 PM
Sapphires weren't really used very much in royal jewelry prior to Prince Albert giving Queen Victoria gifts of sapphires, right? I suppose that's yet another reason to like him. I'm with you, Eric -those pieces are all favorites of mine.

I dunno, there WAS Marie Amelie's parure-did it predate Albert's brooch?  And I think the British had some sapphires.

Beautiful, beautiful stones.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 21, 2006, 09:10:17 PM
Yes...Marie Amaile's parure did predate the Albert booch. Empress Josephine did have some lovely sapphires too.  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on September 23, 2006, 04:17:23 AM
I believe it is the King William IV Brooch. WIV took 6 large brilliants and a number of smaller stones from a diamond-studded Badge of the Order of the Bath that belonged to GIII and crafted the brooch in a circular frame around a center cluster. The statue of QV on the Embankment, which commemorates QV's Golden Jubilee, shows the brooch just under thecollet necklace. QV bequethed the brooch, one of the oldest pieces in the royal collection, to the Crown in 1901.

There's also this great close-up of the brooch, courtesy of GREMB

http://members3.boardhost.com/Oranjes/msg/1144976867.html

The King William IV brooch interests me as it is so beautiful and one of the oldest pieces in the royal collection. Does anyone have any pictures (esp. close up) of the Queen or any Queen wearing it?

Was it worn by William's Queen Adelaide?

The close up picture of the brooch that Grandduchessella posted doesn't work anymore. Does anyone have a close up picture of the William IV brooch? I thought I had one but I can't find it. :(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: TampaBay on September 23, 2006, 06:04:24 AM
Glad you like them too...It worked with Diana because she had blue eyes too. The blue and the blond palette is very attractive.  ;)

Sapphires work because like blue jeans they can be dressed up or down.  The ultimate sapphire piece is the Duchess of Windsor Engagement Bracelet.

TampaBay
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 23, 2006, 08:52:09 AM
A bit big and chunky like all Wallis's jewels (The huge emerald ring, the ruby bangle and the bib necklace...).  :P
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: TampaBay on September 23, 2006, 09:02:01 AM
A bit big and chunky like all Wallis's jewels (The huge emerald ring, the ruby bangle and the bib necklace...).  :P

Big and Chunky is the way I like "'em".

TampaBay
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 23, 2006, 09:05:13 AM
I am sure you like "granny's chips"  ;D
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on September 23, 2006, 09:08:48 AM
Grand Duchess Konstantin senior,had sapphires 3 inches square !!! even her great neice Marie of Romania with HER huge sapphires remarked on them...If Queen Mary ever met her I bet she frothed at the mouth with envy!!!!!
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: TampaBay on September 23, 2006, 09:11:36 AM
I am sure you like "granny's chips"  ;D

Do you mean "Martyn's Chips"!!!   ;D ;D ;D

All women wear the same size in diamonds---EXTRA LARGE!!!  ;) ;) ;)

TampaBay
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 23, 2006, 09:22:55 AM
Bad that we didn't get to see Marva and Sanny's lovely sapphires... :(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: TampaBay on September 23, 2006, 10:16:24 AM
Eric,

If you run into M&S, please ask them to return my sapphires! PRONTO!  ;D ;D ;D

TampaBay
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Robert_Hall on September 23, 2006, 10:22:36 AM
You can buy sapphires at Marks & Spencers?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 23, 2006, 10:23:01 AM
I would certainly do if I get to meet them !  ;D ;D ;D

Do wonder if Marva escaped with her jewels ?  ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 23, 2006, 10:23:48 AM
I think M&S meant Marva & Sanny !  :D
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Robert_Hall on September 23, 2006, 10:25:55 AM
It was a joke, Eric.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 23, 2006, 10:28:17 AM
I see it now... ::)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: TampaBay on September 23, 2006, 10:49:56 AM
Grand Duchess Konstantin senior,had sapphires 3 inches square !!! even her great neice Marie of Romania with HER huge sapphires remarked on them...If Queen Mary ever met her I bet she frothed at the mouth with envy!!!!!

She bought them at my garage sale!!!    ;D ;D ;D

I should never have sold those stones but I had to bail THE Grand Duke out of jail.   ;D ;D ;D

TampaBay
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 23, 2006, 11:21:48 AM
Seriously...What have become of the Konstaninovitch jewelry ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on September 23, 2006, 01:13:50 PM
Seriously...What have become of the Konstaninovitch jewelry ???
[If Mavra saved anything she sent it out with the Swedish or Danish Embassy ahead of her.When she fled with her 2 youngest children and some staff by boat to Sweden...even her glasses case was ripped open in the numerous searches.../quote]
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on September 23, 2006, 02:14:51 PM
Seriously...What have become of the Konstaninovitch jewelry ???

I think that Mavra depended largely on her Saxe-Altenberg family so it doesn't seem like they had much they escaped with.

Queen Victoria's Sapphire Tiara--designed by Albert, I think. Between this and the Albert brooch, he must've liked them.
(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/QueenVictoriasSapphireDiamondTiara.jpg)

Queen Victoria wearing the tiara:
(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/bhc3071_jpg.jpg)

Pss Mary wearing it:
(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/bq193w.jpg)

I guess Queen Mary didn't care for sapphires as much as other jewels--she gave heirloom sapphire sets to both Pss Mary and Marina as wedding gifts.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on September 23, 2006, 02:31:34 PM
One of the best sapphires ever: Missy's sapphire, which was sold into the Greek royal family who also sold it eventually.

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/01020307771001.jpg)

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/img242.jpg)

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/Irene20et20Frederika1.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: TampaBay on September 23, 2006, 02:51:40 PM
I want that Sapphire!!!!

Who owns it now!!!

TampaBay
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: TampaBay on September 23, 2006, 02:53:41 PM
Some rich person bought the sapphire and GAVE it to Qeen Freddy!!!  :o :o :o

I do not understand why Freddy had to have all the luck!

TampaBay
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 23, 2006, 07:31:28 PM
Hmmmm...I held that Sapphire myself when the jewel came on show in Hong Kong.  ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on September 23, 2006, 08:07:28 PM
Can anyone help me with my request to see the William IV brooch

or tell me anything about it? ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on September 23, 2006, 08:26:08 PM
(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/WiliamIVbrooch1.jpg)

Here's what The Queen's Jewels by Fields says:

"In 1830, King William IV took 6 large brilliants and a number of smaller stones from a diamond-studded Badge of the Order of the Bath that had belonged to his father...and had this brooch made using the 6 large stones set in a circular frame around a cluster centre."

Queen Alexandra wore it at her waist at EVII's first Opening of Parliament

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/alexandra6-2636181.jpg) (http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/alexandra6-2636181sautoirw.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on September 23, 2006, 08:37:02 PM
Thank you GDE. I know I had that picture somewhere, I just can't find it.

I wonder if Queen Adelaide wore it?

Does anyone know if any of Queen Adelaide's other jewels are in the Royal Family's Collection still?

I think that the George III Fringe Tiara was worn by Adelaide, or is that not correct?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on September 23, 2006, 09:57:59 PM
Doesn't Victoria's sapphire and diamond tiara now belong to Princess Mary's descendents?

grandduchessella, I hope you don't mind, but I'm taking a tour of your photobucket album-so beautiful.  I'm such a sucker for royal bling!
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on September 23, 2006, 10:33:05 PM
Prince Albert brooch

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/scan20prince20albert20small1.jpg)

Is QV wearing it on her necklace in this portrait?

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/Victoria2.jpg)

This was a wedding present to Queen Mary from MF and AIII. They also added a matching sapphire & diamond bracelet but I don't think I've ever seen a picture.

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/scan20mary20russian20brooch20small1.jpg)

Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on September 23, 2006, 10:39:20 PM
Empress Marie Feodorvna's brooch. It was a wedding gift from Bertie & Alix in 1866. QM bought it from her estate.

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/File0601.jpg)

Another sapphire:

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/sapphire31.jpg)

I think AII gave this one to his daughter Marie Coburg:

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/sapphireAIILondonGreatExhibition186.jpg)

This one is also a Russian sapphire:

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/blueston1ceylonsapphireofrussia260c.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on September 23, 2006, 10:43:23 PM
Doesn't Victoria's sapphire and diamond tiara now belong to Princess Mary's descendents?

grandduchessella, I hope you don't mind, but I'm taking a tour of your photobucket album-so beautiful.  I'm such a sucker for royal bling!


Yes, Pss Mary was given the tiara, and some other pieces, as a wedding gift from her parents. Her descendants still own it.

I don't mind you touring--I didn't know you could though! Glad you like it.  :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Taren on September 23, 2006, 11:12:08 PM
Is QV wearing it on her necklace in this portrait?

(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f282/vickyandfritz/jewels/Victoria2.jpg)


That painting reminds me of Diana's sapphire brooch (a gift from the Queen Mother) that she had attached to the pearl necklaces to form my favorite piece of jewelry. Could this have been her inspiration for that?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on September 24, 2006, 12:11:51 AM
If you cut and paste the URL of the photo, and just take out the file name, you can look around, unless someone's album is private.  I just like to browse.

I could spend ALL DAY looking at royal bling.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 24, 2006, 09:37:31 AM
Indeed ! Saphhires are my best friends !  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Emperor of the Dominions on September 24, 2006, 07:19:15 PM
Does anyone think that a new jewel will be made to mark the 60 years reign of HM Queen Elizabeth II ? I suspect there is plenty of scope for the use of stones from 'dated' jewels within the Royal collection, or maybe some loose ones that aren't doing anything at the moment.
Didn't HM Queen Victoria have a necklace made to mark the 60th year of her reign?
Let's hope it's something that will compliment the small diamond crown (made for Victoria) so we can see our gracious Queen wearing both.

R.I.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 24, 2006, 09:08:22 PM
I think it would be better if the nation or the dominions present her with a jewel than one she asked for. I think a diamond choker or ring would be nice for her to wear for her diamond jubiliee celebration.  :D :D :D
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on September 27, 2006, 03:57:32 PM
It would be nice to see a gift from the nation presented to the Queen - i mean if Australia can give her a new gold coach of her 80th Birthday then what about our nation? Was there any presents from the Government or nation to mark her 80th b-day or golden jubillee?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 27, 2006, 10:41:51 PM
I most cerainly hope so... ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on September 28, 2006, 12:15:27 AM
To continue on the discussion going on in the Queen Alexandra thread, I am sure the Emerald Tiara of Queen Victoria did not go to Princess Mary, or to any of Edward VII's descendents. Or else we would have heard of it I'm pretty sure.

QV must have left it to one of her other children/their descendents for some reason/s.

My cover of the wonderful, indispensable Munn book looks like this:

(http://images.amazon.com/images/P/1851493751.01.MZZZZZZZ.jpg)

This is Queen Victoria's emerald tiara.

I read somewhere else around here, someone said that it had been sold from the royal collection. Who sold it?

I am angry at them! >:(

Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 28, 2006, 01:11:21 AM
I don't think it was sold ! Who said it better prove it... >:(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on September 28, 2006, 08:43:17 AM
In my research efforts last night, I did not come across anything that told me the emerald and diamond tiara went to Princess Mary.  Must be my age catching up with me - perhaps I got the sapphire and the emerald tiaras mixed up.  The only thing Munn has to say about it is that it still 'survives intact in the hands of a descendant of Queen Victoria, who lent it to the Samaritans exhibition in 1997.'  Actually that may not be the exact words, but that is the gist. 
I hereby retract my earlier assertion that it had been sold, and my misguided impression that Princess Mary somehow managed to get her hands on it. 
So at least we know it hasn't been broken up, but it sure would be nice to see it on someone's head.   
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on September 28, 2006, 08:59:11 AM
Quote
So at least we know it hasn't been broken up, but it sure would be nice to see it on someone's head.   

I can say that again! I wonder who has it. I think breaking it up would have to be illegal, considering it's historical associations. So at least we can be thankful it is not broken up.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on September 28, 2006, 09:23:49 AM

So at least we know it hasn't been broken up, but it sure would be nice to see it on someone's head.   

I should have added, 'preferably mine'.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on September 28, 2006, 10:25:37 AM

So at least we know it hasn't been broken up, but it sure would be nice to see it on someone's head.   

I should have added, 'preferably mine'.

No preferably mine!  ;D It would go wonderfully with my eyes.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 28, 2006, 11:50:00 AM
I do wonder who ownes it ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on September 29, 2006, 02:46:35 AM
I have a feeling the emerald tiara is owned by a descendant of Lady Patricia Ramsay.....
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 29, 2006, 03:11:51 AM
I think I do say I suspect it was the Connaughts who got it...Lady Pat was the second daughter. It could be part of her dowery.  ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on September 29, 2006, 12:48:22 PM
Is there not a picture of someone wearing this tiara over a velvet cap (in a slightly medievil way)? I remember seeing it but dont have a copy and never noitced a name?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: veezee on September 29, 2006, 01:03:21 PM
There is a picture in Munn's book on page 74 of Princess Victoria of Hesse wearing it over (around) the velvet cap.  Munn seems to feel that she was loaned this tiara for the fancy dress ball celebrating the wedding of Prince Leopole in 1882.  She would have just turned 19. While it was lovely to have her pose with this wonderful tiara, her greatest role was as Prince Philip's grandmother.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on September 29, 2006, 01:55:58 PM
I think I do say I suspect it was the Connaughts who got it...Lady Pat was the second daughter. It could be part of her dowery.  ???

I wonder why she never wore it then? She had to attend coronations, etc...
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Taren on September 29, 2006, 02:21:31 PM
Is there not a picture of someone wearing this tiara over a velvet cap (in a slightly medievil way)? I remember seeing it but dont have a copy and never noitced a name?

A colorized version of the picture is about halfway down the page here: http://forum.alexanderpalace.org/index.php/topic,610.150.html (http://forum.alexanderpalace.org/index.php/topic,610.150.html)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 29, 2006, 09:14:16 PM
Maybe Lady Pat did not want to show it off ? She was a very interesting person. She married a commoner and let go of her position as princess, but she was very concerned to her position in the coronation as a member of the royal family ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on September 29, 2006, 09:26:30 PM
I don't know--the coronations and other formal events that she wore various tiaras to would've been a good opportunity to show off such a lovely and historic tiara. She actually wore some rather blah ones.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 29, 2006, 09:32:04 PM
I think I saw Lady pat wore a diamond fringe at George VI's coronation... ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on September 29, 2006, 10:26:50 PM
Yes, she did.

She wore a spiky one--somewhat reminscent of Beatrice's Strawberry Leaf one--at at celebration in Sweden--Ingrid's wedding perhaps?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 29, 2006, 11:53:05 PM
I think she inheirited that piece from her mother Louise of Prussia. Didn't see much of QV's jewelry bequest on her.  ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on September 30, 2006, 02:19:31 AM
Patricia had plenty of choice in her jewelbox.The items sold in 1974 (after her death)make impressive reading and include a huge edwardian diamond bow,a rivere,countless multicoloured clips and brooches and a diamond tiara worn by Princess Marie Louise in some of her Beaton photograph.Maybe her daughter in law wore the tiara or for another reason Patsy prefered her other tiaras...
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 30, 2006, 10:14:46 AM
I wonder who she auction it Sotheby's or Chrsitie's ? I think it is where we researchers step in find the pieces where do they go. Did her family kept a collection after the sale in 1974 ? The emerald tiara maybe one of the ones they kept... ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on September 30, 2006, 10:19:40 AM
Why is there any reason to assume that Pat even got the Emerald tiara? She probably did not.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 30, 2006, 10:21:31 AM
I think Lady Pat is a strong suspect in this case.  ::)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on September 30, 2006, 10:35:05 AM
But where's the evidence? Was the emerald tiara ever even associated with her in the slightest?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on September 30, 2006, 12:47:43 PM
Not as far as I know.

She did leave a diamond brooch she wore at her wedding, which was itself a present from the Duchess of Connaught, to her niece, Queen Ingrid of Denmark.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 30, 2006, 08:14:59 PM
I think most probably the tiara went to either the Connaughts, the Harewoods (Princess Mary), the Fifes (Princess Louise) or  Princess Beatrice's decendents (with the exception of Ena).  ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on October 01, 2006, 02:14:15 AM
What about one of Vicky's descendents?

Or Alice's?

Or Leopold's?

Or Alfreds?

The Harewoods were asked what royal tiaras they had by Munn- they said, only one, Queen Victoria's Sapphire, it was a surprise that they had it and it was put into the exhibition. No chance that they have the emarald too I think.

The Fife's - very remote possibility. I don't think so. Some evidence would exist if that was the case. It didn't go to Maud cause it's not in the Norweigan royal family. Maybe it went to George V's descendents and they just put it in the vault and never took it out again. Which seems very bizarre as it is SO beautiful.

The only descendents' Princess Beatice has (with the exception of Ena and her descendents) is Lady Iris Mountabatten, whose now dead of course, her son, and his illegitimate children. The idea that any of them have it is just ridiculous! Iris was poor by the sound of things.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: TampaBay on October 01, 2006, 06:44:43 AM
My guess is the tiara is in the Buck House jewel vault in a box covered with dust that QEII has not opened in 40years.  She probably forgot she even had "the thing".

This can really happened becuse it happened with me and pair of shoes in the wrong dusty box just the other day.  ;D ;D ;D

TampaBay
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on October 01, 2006, 07:07:02 AM
It really does make yu wonder just how much jewels that there are in those vaults of buckingham palace; it is a shame that her majesty isnt that overly fond of the jewels or we might have a better chance of guessing the extent of her collection.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on October 01, 2006, 08:45:09 AM
My guess is the tiara is in the Buck House jewel vault in a box covered with dust that QEII has not opened in 40years.  She probably forgot she even had "the thing".

This can really happened becuse it happened with me and pair of shoes in the wrong dusty box just the other day.  ;D ;D ;D

TampaBay

It is hard to believe anyone, even the Queen, could forget they had QV's emerald tiara.

But the thing is, if the tiara was in the possession of the Queen, why would Munn have said ''in the possession of a descendent of QV'', he would have just said the Royal Family has it?

So that would suggest it is owned by a descendent of Vicky's, Alice's, Leopold's, or Alfred's, or as some seem to think,  Princess Patricia got it, but I don't think so.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 01, 2006, 09:33:16 AM
I don't see why Lady Pat should not have it. As the younger daughter of the favourite son of QV, she would be in the running of some really nice jewels from grandmama queen. Other runners are Lord Harewood (who got the sapphire one), The Fifes (the decendents of Maud Carnegie) and mabe Beatrice's son...

I know from a source close to the palace that the last royal to catalogue the Royal Jewelry was Queen Mary. She handwritten the describtion on slips of paper attached to the strong metal boxes that are stored in Buck House. Not even the present Queen had checked everything since the old Queen died... :(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on October 01, 2006, 09:40:30 AM
Well do we know if Q Mary catalogued the emerald tiara? Because if they didn't have it then, then they wouldn't have it now.

I already explained why it is highly unlikely that any of your candidates have it - Lord Harewood has said they only have the sapphire one.

The Fifes would have dropped some clue they had such a treausure. They have the Fife tiara anyway, that's definitely enough for them. And Beatrice's son Alexander, even if he did get it, which is very unlikely, he only had one child, Lady Iris, and she did not have it.

So therefore, to sum up, it must be with another lot of descendent/s.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 01, 2006, 09:48:06 AM
No...You did not explain why you think Lady Pat did not have it. Other hot candidates include Princess Alice of Athlone's decendents. I think it would be a toss up between those two.

The contents of QM's boxes are top secret. We may never know the extent of it... :(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on October 01, 2006, 09:54:02 AM
Yes maybe Pat got it. But who would have it now? Her son is dead, right?

Why are all of Vicky's descendents not speculated to have it? We really don't know.....

I always assumed it had been so sadly sold by someone. But the Munn quote proves otherwise I suppose.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 01, 2006, 09:58:08 AM
Alexander had 3 daughters right ? They could have had it.  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on October 01, 2006, 10:04:24 AM
Alexander had 3 daughters right ? They could have had it.  ;)

No just one - Lady Iris Mountbatten. And she ended up in urine-smelling housing in Canada. Can't picture the emerald tiara sitting on the shelf there. ;)

Edit: I thought you meant Alexander Carisbrooke.

Now it hit me you must mean Alexander Ramsay. Yes he had three daughters, they might have it.

Sorry, but too many of these royals have the same name. :-[
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 01, 2006, 10:08:25 AM
Yes I did mean Alexander Ramsey ! Her eldest daughter hava a daughterl too, maybe she will wear the tiara at her wedding... ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on October 01, 2006, 10:11:45 AM
Alexander Ramsey's oldest daugther has two daughters - Louise and Juliet.

If they do have the tiara, I hope they wear it at their wedding, then the mystery will be solved. :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 01, 2006, 10:19:44 AM
Indeed ! They are presently the prime suspects !  ;D
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on October 01, 2006, 10:45:46 AM
The late Alexander Ramsay and his widow Lady Saltoun have 3 daughters...I defintely think the tiara is in their orbit..with the current Duke of Fife as a longshot.I do not think it can be in the hands of Lady May Abel-Smiths descendants (ie passed down from Princess Alice,Countess of Athlone). ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on October 01, 2006, 10:51:55 AM
What if one of Vicky's descendents got it, and it is somewhere in Germany. ???
Did not QV leave any clue who it went to?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 01, 2006, 11:06:35 AM
I personal do not think QV left any jewels to her daughters married aboard. They already have loads of jewels from their dowery settlement. In one letter Vicky told Sophie she cannot spare any more jewels for her, and must wait until she dies.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on October 01, 2006, 03:00:19 PM
Here are the tiaras owned by QV and what happened to them (from Munn's book). These are separate from the tiaras and other jewelry she bequeated to the Crown.

ruby, lasque & pearl tiara with enamal portraits at back (this would be left to Helen Albany)

pearl & diamond tiara composed of 12 Bouton & 13 pear-shaped pearls with a dimaond chain to form necklace (this would be left to Louise Connaught)

15 pt diadem, each point composed of a pearl between 2 emeralds set in gold wire, between each point a large lask diamond surrounded by 7 others, rather smaller; the diadem set on a band of lask diamonds (given to Louise Connaught upon her wedding to Prince Arthur in 1879)

ruby & diamond coronet pattern Head Ornament consisting of 14 lozenge-shaped clusters & 13 strawberry leaves with ruby & diamond band (given to Pss Beatrice at her wedding in 1885)

turquoise & diamond tiara (part of suite) (given to Pss Helena upon her wedding)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on October 01, 2006, 04:22:52 PM
I thought the emerald tiara was auctioned off?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on October 01, 2006, 06:52:09 PM
Munn's book also notes that 'a photograph of the jewel appears in the record books of Cartier in the early twentieth century. Why it was sent to Cartier is uncertain, but it is possible that a subsequent owner had it shortened for ease of wear.' The photo (plate 52) says 'private collection'.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 02, 2006, 12:42:07 AM
I am convinced that a decdended of QV still has the jewel !  ;D
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on October 02, 2006, 05:01:12 AM
Here are the tiaras owned by QV and what happened to them (from Munn's book). These are separate from the tiaras and other jewelry she bequeated to the Crown.

ruby, lasque & pearl tiara with enamal portraits at back (this would be left to Helen Albany)

pearl & diamond tiara composed of 12 Bouton & 13 pear-shaped pearls with a dimaond chain to form necklace (this would be left to Louise Connaught)

15 pt diadem, each point composed of a pearl between 2 emeralds set in gold wire, between each point a large lask diamond surrounded by 7 others, rather smaller; the diadem set on a band of lask diamonds (given to Louise Connaught upon her wedding to Prince Arthur in 1879)

ruby & diamond coronet pattern Head Ornament consisting of 14 lozenge-shaped clusters & 13 strawberry leaves with ruby & diamond band (given to Pss Beatrice at her wedding in 1885)

turquoise & diamond tiara (part of suite) (given to Pss Helena upon her wedding)

But the emerald tiara isn't among the list! I have a hard time remembering what each of those look like without pictures.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on October 02, 2006, 05:02:53 AM
Munn's book also notes that 'a photograph of the jewel appears in the record books of Cartier in the early twentieth century. Why it was sent to Cartier is uncertain, but it is possible that a subsequent owner had it shortened for ease of wear.' The photo (plate 52) says 'private collection'.

That would seem to indicate that it left the family and was sold. Terrible decisioin if that's the case. :(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on October 02, 2006, 05:06:29 AM
(http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j265/feliciavictoria_2006/Some%20More%20Royalty/1may1851.jpg)

What tiara is Queen Victoria wearing in this painting and what happend to it?

I know some claim it is the George III Fringe Tiara but it doesn't look it to me, the rays are thicker. :-\
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on October 02, 2006, 08:58:15 AM
Here are the tiaras owned by QV and what happened to them (from Munn's book). These are separate from the tiaras and other jewelry she bequeated to the Crown.

ruby, lasque & pearl tiara with enamal portraits at back (this would be left to Helen Albany)

pearl & diamond tiara composed of 12 Bouton & 13 pear-shaped pearls with a dimaond chain to form necklace (this would be left to Louise Connaught)

15 pt diadem, each point composed of a pearl between 2 emeralds set in gold wire, between each point a large lask diamond surrounded by 7 others, rather smaller; the diadem set on a band of lask diamonds (given to Louise Connaught upon her wedding to Prince Arthur in 1879)

ruby & diamond coronet pattern Head Ornament consisting of 14 lozenge-shaped clusters & 13 strawberry leaves with ruby & diamond band (given to Pss Beatrice at her wedding in 1885)

turquoise & diamond tiara (part of suite) (given to Pss Helena upon her wedding)

But the emerald tiara isn't among the list! I have a hard time remembering what each of those look like without pictures.

It was a list compiled in 1896 by Garrard--I don't know why or what the criteria was. She obviously had the tiara in 1882 since that's when Victoria Hesse is pictured wearing it.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on October 02, 2006, 10:33:27 AM
(http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j265/feliciavictoria_2006/Some%20More%20Royalty/1may1851.jpg)

What tiara is Queen Victoria wearing in this painting and what happend to it?

I know some claim it is the George III Fringe Tiara but it doesn't look it to me, the rays are thicker. :-\

Well, keep in mind it IS a painting, and the artist could have taken liberties-plus you have the difference in perspective and angles.

It's probably one of the fringe tiaras-how many were there in all?

ETA: I know that this is about Windsor jewelry, but is there anything known at all about the Romanov jewels, like Alix's tiaras and necklaces?  Or were they definitely broken up and sold?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on October 02, 2006, 10:38:01 AM
It seems they definitely were broken up and/or sold. Some just seem to have vanished off the face of the earth.  :(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on October 02, 2006, 01:52:48 PM
Indeed ! They are presently the prime suspects !  ;D

Well, we can definitely take them out of the running. I wrote off to Geoffrey Munn (not that I know him or anything but I thought I'd give it a try!) and he said that the owner isn't identified because of security reasons but he did tell me that it never belonged to Patricia Ramsey. I about fell over when I heard from him--it's so stange (in a good way) to be in contact (however briefly) with an author whose work you really respect and enjoy.  :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on October 02, 2006, 02:48:27 PM
I have met Geoffery Munn on several occassions( the last time in May) he is ultra charming and rather witty...
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on October 02, 2006, 03:15:04 PM
Well, we can definitely take them out of the running. I wrote off to Geoffrey Munn (not that I know him or anything but I thought I'd give it a try!) and he said that the owner isn't identified because of security reasons but he did tell me that it never belonged to Patricia Ramsey. I about fell over when I heard from him--it's so stange (in a good way) to be in contact (however briefly) with an author whose work you really respect and enjoy.  :)

You cunning little minx GDella - going right to the source, how resourceful of you!   :D

'Security reasons' - how intriguing!  That could mean soooo many things.  Maybe the owner doesn't have a safe. :o  (rubs hands together while saying "mwa ha ha ha, mwa ha ha ha..." Or maybe it means that he himself owns it, and keeps it in the loo.   :-\
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Emperor of the Dominions on October 02, 2006, 10:54:47 PM
Well at the very least could it be confirmed that it hasn't been broken up?

R.I.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on October 02, 2006, 11:45:00 PM
Indeed ! They are presently the prime suspects !  ;D

Well, we can definitely take them out of the running. I wrote off to Geoffrey Munn (not that I know him or anything but I thought I'd give it a try!) and he said that the owner isn't identified because of security reasons but he did tell me that it never belonged to Patricia Ramsey. I about fell over when I heard from him--it's so stange (in a good way) to be in contact (however briefly) with an author whose work you really respect and enjoy.  :)

Yes, lucky you to be in contact with Munn. I thought Patricia hadn't got it. Did Munn perhaps confirm that A descendent of QV has it? Or that it was sold right out of the family? It would be good to know either way.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on October 02, 2006, 11:46:42 PM
I have met Geoffery Munn on several occassions( the last time in May) he is ultra charming and rather witty...

I like to watch "Antiques Roadshow'' hoping he will come on tv, but he hardly ever does.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on October 02, 2006, 11:56:28 PM
Well at the very least could it be confirmed that it hasn't been broken up?

R.I.

I'm pretty sure it hasn't. No one would be so stupid to BREAK-UP such a beautiful treasure!

Here is a nice bigger picture of it:

(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/1851493751.01._SS500_SCLZZZZZZZ_V1114162211_.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on October 03, 2006, 05:29:38 AM
I am sure that if it was around for that fairly recent picture to be taken then it is still around - maybe one day it will be seen on someones head, and the mystery will be solved.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on October 03, 2006, 06:06:58 AM
It would be a very pleasant surprise and shock if we suddenly saw it on someone's head.

I think the main line Royal Family must NOT have it in their vaults, or Munn wouldn't say he can't say who the owner is for ''security reasons''. Cause we know most of the royal family's tiaras anyway.

I think it must be one of QV's descendents who is not really famous with lots of other treasures. Kind of like the Harewoods have the sapphire one, some branch of the family must have the emerald one. But not the Harewoods I'm sure they wouldn't get both.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on October 03, 2006, 08:52:19 AM
As paraphrased from Munn's book in an earlier post, the tiara survives intact in the hands of a QVD.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 03, 2006, 10:35:33 AM
Who ?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on October 03, 2006, 10:36:56 AM
He doesn't say--he only says that it's a descendant. He isn't going to reveal the name as per their request. He seems to have given hs word to the owners--I don't think he will likely break it. He seemed quite firm (though very polite) on the matter.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on October 03, 2006, 11:00:26 AM
Is it perhaps possible that we could assume that it is with an ENGLISH descendent of Queen Victoria?

And not off in Spain, or Germany, etc.

We should all be happy at least that a QVD has it, and it hasn't been broken up.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 03, 2006, 11:03:40 AM
Quite sure it was in England as I did study the jewels of the other branches as well... :(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on October 03, 2006, 11:08:09 AM
Pity your Princess Pat theory has been ruled out.

The Fifes - no they have the fife.

Harewoods - they have stated that they only have the sapphire one.

I really don't think it went to George V's descendents.

Maybe Alice Athlone? ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on October 03, 2006, 12:07:10 PM
I don't think it would be terribly wise to try to force the issue with Mr Munn.  He has already been asked once, and we should respect his response; especially if we want to leave our avenues open for the next time we have a question within his area of expertise.  Of course his integrity is one reason that any of the QVDs would trust him with the info in the first place.   
The next coronation is probably the next chance to see the piece and that can't be more than 25 years or so away - we've waited this long!   ;D
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 03, 2006, 08:29:25 PM
I don't know if it would be worned anyway. Did you see anyone wore it after VMH ?  ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: aussiechick12 on October 03, 2006, 09:23:05 PM
I've recently been looking back at all the old jewel threads and around some great sites too.
If found this picture of Queen Elizabeth (I put it in a thumbnail because it was huge!) and she's wearing the Vladimir Tiara. Because I'm new to jewels I was wondering whether you call the things near her shoulder "orders"? So would you call these ones: "The Order of Edward VIII" and "The Order of George V"? I don't think you can see them clearly enough to identify who is in the picture though.
Sorry if I got it completley wrong!

(http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Queen%20Elizabeth%20II/th_Jewels-VladimirTiara-Elizabeth.jpg) (http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Queen%20Elizabeth%20II/Jewels-VladimirTiara-Elizabeth.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Taren on October 03, 2006, 09:47:53 PM
Edward VIII never got orders, but yes, they are orders. HM wears the orders of her father and grandfather. George V's is the slightly greenish one and George VI's is pink. HM's is yellow I believe, but she doesn't wear her own. As far as I know you call them "the order of *insert monarch here*".
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 03, 2006, 09:57:03 PM
Yes...Edward VIII reigned too short for orders to appear. I guess the first one would be for Wallis I guess !  :P
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: aussiechick12 on October 03, 2006, 10:17:31 PM
Thank you Taren and Eric!  :)

The Cambridge and Indian Emeralds:
(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e182/aussiechick12/Windsors/th_Jewels-CambridgeandIndianEmeralds1.jpg) (http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e182/aussiechick12/Windsors/Jewels-CambridgeandIndianEmeralds1.jpg)

Queen Mary wearing them:
(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e182/aussiechick12/Windsors/th_Jewels-CambridgeandIndianEmeralds.jpg) (http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e182/aussiechick12/Windsors/Jewels-CambridgeandIndianEmeralds.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 03, 2006, 10:19:18 PM
Emeralds are one of my favourite stones...Thanks for showing them again.  ;D
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: aussiechick12 on October 03, 2006, 10:57:15 PM
No problem, but personally I perfer sapphires  ;) Which is a perfect excuse to look at some!

Diana's Engagement Ring, which is now in pocession of Prince Harry:

(http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Princess%20Diana/th_Jewels-Diana-EngagementRing2.jpg) (http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Princess%20Diana/Jewels-Diana-EngagementRing2.jpg)

(http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Princess%20Diana/th_Jewels-Diana-EngagementRing1.jpg) (http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Princess%20Diana/Jewels-Diana-EngagementRing1.jpg)

(http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Princess%20Diana/th_Jewels-Diana-EngagementRing.jpg) (http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Princess%20Diana/Jewels-Diana-EngagementRing.jpg)

Diana's Sapphire Choker:
(http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Princess%20Diana/th_Diana-Sapphire.jpg) (http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Princess%20Diana/Diana-Sapphire.jpg)

For Diana's Wedding the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia gave her a suite of diamonds and sapphires including; a diamond and sapphire pendant, matching earrings, matching ring, bracelet and a watch:
(http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Princess%20Diana/th_Jewels-DiamondSuiteforDianaswedding.jpg) (http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Princess%20Diana/Jewels-DiamondSuiteforDianaswedding.jpg)

These are the earrings given from the Crown Prince:
(http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Princess%20Diana/th_Jewels-Diana1.jpg) (http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Princess%20Diana/Jewels-Diana1.jpg)

These are her Sapphire and Diamond drops; the top diamond is surrounded by ten diamonds and the bottom, 11:
(http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Princess%20Diana/th_Jewels-Diana2.jpg) (http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Princess%20Diana/Jewels-Diana2.jpg)

This is Diana and Charles in Melbourne (Australia) at the Hyatt Hotel dancing and wearing the Diamond and Sapphire Bracelet the Crown Prince gave her:
(http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Princess%20Diana/th_Jewels-DianaandCharlesinMelbournewe.jpg) (http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Princess%20Diana/Jewels-DianaandCharlesinMelbournewe.jpg)

This is Diana at a state reception wearing the same bracelet as above, the Spencer Tiara and the Order of Elizabeth II:
(http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Princess%20Diana/th_Jewels-DianawearingtheCrownPrinceje.jpg) (http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Princess%20Diana/Jewels-DianawearingtheCrownPrinceje.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on October 04, 2006, 12:39:08 AM
I don't know if it would be worned anyway. Did you see anyone wore it after VMH ?  ???

Since a QVD has it, they must wear it eventually if they get the opportunity. Or else it's a great pity otherwise. :(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on October 04, 2006, 12:52:53 AM
Those are some great pics AussieChick.

I love Diana's engament ring. I wonder if Harry will give it to his betrothed?

Emeralds and sapphires, I can't decide which I like more. Probably sapphires, by a little bit.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Taren on October 04, 2006, 01:25:46 AM
Those are some great pics AussieChick.

I love Diana's engament ring. I wonder if Harry will give it to his betrothed?

Emeralds and sapphires, I can't decide which I like more. Probably sapphires, by a little bit.

Actually, I think William got the ring. Personally, even though I love the ring (love love love -sapphires are my favorite), I hope he doesn't give it to his future wife. It would be inviting in all sorts of comparisons and whoever she may be, she'll have big enough shoes to fill as it is.

Oh and thank you, Aussiechick12 for posting the pictures of sapphires. There's currently quite the puddle of drool in front of me. :D
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: aussiechick12 on October 04, 2006, 01:43:01 AM
 :D No problem guys!

No, Harry definitley got the ring. The two boys were allowed to visit Kensington Palace and select an item from her pocessions - Harry chose the ring and William chose the 18 carat gold Cartier watch (pictured below).

(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e182/aussiechick12/Windsors/Eddy/th_Jewels-CartierWatch.jpg) (http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e182/aussiechick12/Windsors/Eddy/Jewels-CartierWatch.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: basilforever on October 04, 2006, 02:30:41 AM
They were allowed to choose one item each from her possessions? I thought they would have gotten all of Diana's possessions! ???

Maybe Harry would like to give the ring to his future wife for sentimental reasons, and they will be strong enough to disregard any comparisons that invites. It would be understandable if he did that, and quite sweet.

The pic of the watch doesn't work currently. :)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on October 04, 2006, 04:28:02 PM
It has always been said that Diana left all her jewels to the two Boys; however Paul Burrell (i dont know if he can be trusted to get it right) but in his books he says that all the jewels went to Althrop other then those that were royal jewels. Is there any truth in this because i always presumed they would be in the safe's at Clarence House - not that of Earl Spence even though he was the executor of the will.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: aussiechick12 on October 04, 2006, 05:44:56 PM

The pic of the watch doesn't work currently. :)

Whoops! I had put it in the wrong place in my photobucket account and deleted it without thinking! (I won't be deleting this one  ::)) Here it is again:

(http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Princess%20Diana/th_Jewels-CartierWatch.jpg) (http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Princess%20Diana/Jewels-CartierWatch.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on October 04, 2006, 10:25:29 PM
I don't think it would be terribly wise to try to force the issue with Mr Munn.  He has already been asked once, and we should respect his response; especially if we want to leave our avenues open for the next time we have a question within his area of expertise.  Of course his integrity is one reason that any of the QVDs would trust him with the info in the first place.   
The next coronation is probably the next chance to see the piece and that can't be more than 25 years or so away - we've waited this long!   ;D



I agree-if said person is worried about security reasons, that's good enough.  (I also wonder if perhaps they don't have insurance on it...although with something like that, it would be priceless-insurance couldn't compensate for the historical and sentimental value!)

Diana sure did like her sapphires, didn't she?  Can't say I blame her. 

Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 05, 2006, 03:15:44 AM
They matched her lovely eyes.  ;)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on October 05, 2006, 06:06:43 PM
I wonder if she was ever allowed to borrow the Prince Albert Brooch?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Grace on October 05, 2006, 06:19:18 PM
Paul Burrell (and though I query the need for another book by him, I don't believe he has reason to fabricate stories about Diana's jewellery) indicates that Diana didn't borrow jewellery from the royal collection at all, but wore those pieces that had been given to her from the Queen, the Spencer tiara (which Charles Spencer demanded back in 1993) and a mixture of her own and costume jewellery.  He says that her royal jewellery collection was quite small.

Burrell claims that Diana did not like ostentatious displays of jewellery as she felt it took away from her rapport with every day people.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: aussiechick12 on October 05, 2006, 07:18:19 PM
I wonder if she was ever allowed to borrow the Prince Albert Brooch?

The Prince Albert Brooch would look go really nice with her eyes, just like Eric said. If she had wanted to wear it, would she have been allowed to?
(http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/th_Jewels-PrinceAlbertBrooch.jpg) (http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l212/princessaussie/Jewels/Jewels-PrinceAlbertBrooch.jpg)

Why did Charles Spencer demand the Tiara back?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 05, 2006, 09:36:33 PM
Well...Diana loaned it...not owned it ! Charles Spencer had every right to get it back for his wife and daughters.  ::)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Taren on October 05, 2006, 09:49:24 PM
Paul Burrell (and though I query the need for another book by him, I don't believe he has reason to fabricate stories about Diana's jewellery) indicates that Diana didn't borrow jewellery from the royal collection at all, but wore those pieces that had been given to her from the Queen, the Spencer tiara (which Charles Spencer demanded back in 1993) and a mixture of her own and costume jewellery.  He says that her royal jewellery collection was quite small.

Burrell claims that Diana did not like ostentatious displays of jewellery as she felt it took away from her rapport with every day people.

But she was loaned and not given the Lover's Knot tiara, though, right? Ditto the Cambridge emeralds. Or am I wrong and they were gifts?
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 05, 2006, 09:55:19 PM
They were gifts as long as they remain in the royal family. Every bride was given jewels for them to use in public events. Princess Diana was the last to be given historical jewels to wear on a regular basis (both Sophie & Fergie were not given historically important jewels).  ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Grace on October 06, 2006, 01:18:01 AM
Well...Diana loaned it...not owned it ! Charles Spencer had every right to get it back for his wife and daughters.  ::)

I'm not disputing that the Spencer tiara belonged within the family, Eric, but I question Spencer's reasons for insisting on its return when he did.  Clearly, in Diana's position, she would have more occasion to use it than either his wife or daughters would.  I wonder why it couldn't be shared between them when necessary.   
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 06, 2006, 02:10:46 AM
I think they had a childish tiff and Earl Spencer exerise his rights as owner to claim the jewel back.  :(
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on October 06, 2006, 05:49:51 AM
Well...Diana loaned it...not owned it ! Charles Spencer had every right to get it back for his wife and daughters.  ::)

I'm not disputing that the Spencer tiara belonged within the family, Eric, but I question Spencer's reasons for insisting on its return when he did.  Clearly, in Diana's position, she would have more occasion to use it than either his wife or daughters would.  I wonder why it couldn't be shared between them when necessary.   
I think the tiara went back & forth between the family...Diana certainly wore it before AND after her brothers first wife Victoria wore it ON HER weddingday....
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Grace on October 06, 2006, 07:01:25 AM
Well...Diana loaned it...not owned it ! Charles Spencer had every right to get it back for his wife and daughters.  ::)

I'm not disputing that the Spencer tiara belonged within the family, Eric, but I question Spencer's reasons for insisting on its return when he did.  Clearly, in Diana's position, she would have more occasion to use it than either his wife or daughters would.  I wonder why it couldn't be shared between them when necessary.   
I think the tiara went back & forth between the family...Diana certainly wore it before AND after her brothers first wife Victoria wore it ON HER weddingday....

Charles Spencer's first marriage to Victoria Lockwood was in 1989.  He reclaimed the Spencer tiara in 1993 and Diana didn't have it after this time.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Guinastasia on October 06, 2006, 07:34:05 AM
Well...Diana loaned it...not owned it ! Charles Spencer had every right to get it back for his wife and daughters.  ::)

I'm not disputing that the Spencer tiara belonged within the family, Eric, but I question Spencer's reasons for insisting on its return when he did.  Clearly, in Diana's position, she would have more occasion to use it than either his wife or daughters would.  I wonder why it couldn't be shared between them when necessary.   

I think he was annoyed (and rightly so) that she refused to pay any of the hefty insurance on it. 

And quite honestly, if I had access to those kinds of rocks, I'd be wearing my tiara constantly-to the grocery store, out to get the mail, etc.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on October 06, 2006, 08:36:58 AM
I wonder if she was ever allowed to borrow the Prince Albert Brooch?

It has been said that Diana was not fond of brooches and disliked wearing ithem.  QEQM gave her a massive sapphire and diamond brooch (larger than the PA brooch) and she only wore it a few times in its original form - a state banquet with the visiting Queen Beatrix springs immediately to mind - before having it adapted to wear as the centre ornament in a nine-row pearl choker. 
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Eric_Lowe on October 06, 2006, 09:42:41 AM
Yes...Diana does loved chokers. Maybe The Queen should have given her the dog-collars of Queen Alexandra ?  ???
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: Leuchtenberg on October 06, 2006, 09:48:17 AM
I wonder if she was ever allowed to borrow the Prince Albert Brooch?

It has been said that Diana was not fond of brooches and disliked wearing ithem.  QEQM gave her a massive sapphire and diamond brooch (larger than the PA brooch) and she only wore it a few times in its original form - a state banquet with the visiting Queen Beatrix springs immediately to mind - before having it adapted to wear as the centre ornament in a nine-row pearl choker. 

It looked magnificent as the centrepiece of the pearl choker.  It was probably my favourite of all Diana's jewels.
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on October 06, 2006, 09:54:05 AM
Unfortunately, I cannot locate the pic of the brooch as worn at the banquet, but here is the reworked version.

(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/1986.jpg)

Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: emeraldeyes on October 06, 2006, 10:28:19 AM
tracked down a pic...


(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/emeraldeyes1969/bigbrooch-1.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: ashdean on October 07, 2006, 06:03:08 AM
Yes that choker does Belong to our beloved Queen..
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: boffer on October 07, 2006, 06:15:59 AM
This chocker was made from family pearls, with the central diamond motif; there is also the option of adding another two additional strands of pearls.

I have only ever seen HM wear it once.

(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e367/Bofferding/QueenElizabeth-TiaraFourRowChock-1.jpg)
Title: Re: Windsor Jewels Part 4
Post by: grandduchessella on October 07, 2006, 12:07:21 PM
Since this page has far exceeded the unofficial '20 page' rule, I'm going to start a new Windsor Jewels thread. Any further discussions on the brooch, Spencer tiara, etc...can be continued on here so as not to lose continuity but any new topics should be started on the new thread.