Royal Jewels

[prince.of.preslav]

Laurie, I agree with you about the various types of properties of the British Monarchs. Indeed it would be a nighmare to understand what fits in which category if the Monarchy were to be abolished.

It's only one necklace and it was a present from the Emir of Qatar in 1985. It's known as the Ruby Swag necklace. Queen Silvia has a similar one with emeralds.

 

[JewelFreak]

Thanks, Bobby, on the necklace. It's very pretty. Doesn't seem the Queen has worn it often & it looks so nice on her.

I just LOVE the photo of Queen Mary peering through her lorgnette. I'll bet she could give some poor offending soul a killer glare with those -- imagine being on the wrong end of that! How to shrink to 1" tall.

Bobby, I had brain fade on the QM's will. Saw a comment on another website & remembered it as coming from you, but I was wrong. Someone wrote that the Queen Mum left her Greville jewels to Queen Elizabeth, marked "for the use of the Princess of Wales." Thinking it was you, I was curious where to find the will. After more research I realized whoever wrote that was speculating since nobody has seen it outside the RF. Sorry! Anyway, now we know the will status.

-- Laurie

 

[prince.of.preslav]

Thanks, Bobby, on the necklace. It's very pretty. Doesn't seem the Queen has worn it often & it looks so nice on her.

I just LOVE the photo of Queen Mary peering through her lorgnette. I'll bet she could give some poor offending soul a killer glare with those -- imagine being on the wrong end of that! How to shrink to 1" tall.

Bobby, I had brain fade on the QM's will. Saw a comment on another website & remembered it as coming from you, but I was wrong. Someone wrote that the Queen Mum left her Greville jewels to Queen Elizabeth, marked "for the use of the Princess of Wales." Thinking it was you, I was curious where to find the will. After more research I realized whoever wrote that was speculating since nobody has seen it outside the RF. Sorry! Anyway, now we know the will status.

-- Laurie

You're welcome, Laurie.
Re the will - I did indeed comment here that maybe the Queen Mother left certain jewels to The Queen (her daughter) because of free death duties with the proviso that they should be worn by the next Princess of Wales, whoever she might be. And as it happens it'sCamilla. But that was 100% speculation on my part. And I don't really believe that. I just wrote it for the sake of speculating. If someone else has quoted me elsewhere, that's the person's problem that s/he hasn't understood (or hasn't added) that is a pure speculation. The will of the late Queen Mother, as you say, is kept in secret.

It's not you'r fault, Laurie. You've just mixed a couple of wrong statements from the Internet.

Warm regards,
Bobby

 

[T L]

JewelFreak,
Thank you so much for the Medieval jewelry artifacts. Just beautiful!!!

 

[T L]

part4

I don't think I've ever seen HM in a off the shoulder gown like that. Very risque for Her Majesty. She does look lovely though.

 

[gussysmom]

I hope this is not too far off topic; but I have always wondered if anyone ever saw the Pearl Sautoir of Queen ELizabeth QM again? There's a picture of her wearing it in the Leslie Fields book. I gather she wore it when she was a young bride. Its quite long but I personally think it would still be considered quite contemporary to wear again today.

Thanks for all the other information and stunning pictures. I love this forum.

 

[JewelFreak]

JewelFreak,
Thank you so much for the Medieval jewelry artifacts. Just beautiful!!!

You're welcome, TL. I can't get over the fact that all those items except the helmet piece are the size of a regular button. Blows me away! How did they manage it?

--- Laurie

 

[alexander1917]

of course we can post a list.

I think (!) that HM's private property is a collection of art, land and homes which passed from Sovereign to Soveriegn. They are not property of the State or the Crown.
And although it's private property they are some gifts - like the rubies of the Burmese Tiara, or the GoGBaITiara which from official fonds, people and so one, which should go from Sovereign to Sovereign.
I further think, that QM with her well-grounded knowledge of history and of royal anastors, she left a detailed "wish"list what items will be left to the next King or Queen.


and of course some other items are property of HM, but you really can think of an action or private selling of Cullinan chips???

Hi Alexander!

By private property we should understand the real estate, works of art, furniture, etc that HM owns as a private individual and that she can pass to her descendants and friends. Private property also includes the jewels that have been presented to The Queen, that she has aquaired privateley or has inherited from family members, friends and other people. The jewels that automatically pass from one Sovereign to another (such as QV's collet necklace, Prince Albert's sapphire brooch, the Hannoverian pearls and others) aren't Elizabeth's private property.
Yes, the Burmese rubies (now set in a tiara), the fringe necklace, the GGB&I tiara and other jewels were bought by fund raising, but so were other jewels like the Kent fringe tiara and a sautoir for Princess Royal Mary among others and these jewels are/were defiantly the private property of these families. Do you think that they should also pass from a King to a King? I'd also like to see the Burmese tiara the Girls of GB&I, the kokoshnik, the chips and many other jewels worn by the next Queens of GB, but there's nothing that prevents HM to will these pieces to other members of her family, even you and me.

Bobby

of course, mabe the term "held in trust" for the next generation would be more suitable.

if those itema, really the property of the Kent family or the Harewoods I don't know. I think that there is an agreement or something like this that when for example a family line will ended - those items from the RF return to them. I read thomewhere - but can't remeber where - that some pieces from the late Princess Margret went back to the Queen. Also the Jewels of the Queen Mother went back to HM.
And yes this is some practice to avoid death duties.

and yes it is dificult to understand the those practices to to bequeath some items to the Crown, some to the Sovereign and to spread some private (smaller) items to friends and family.
I also remeber that items from the late Princess of Wales returned to HM, held in trust for the furture wive of Prince William.
So it would be also possible that HM got access to those items, and wear them - of course she wouldn't do this.
In my opinion there are 2 main points:
first to avoid death taxes
second to held the collection for further generations together.

As I was never in the strong room of Buckingham Palace - it is also difficult to say which items are really still exists. In my opinion onloy Queen Mary got the full accounts of what is owned, in poseccion or however else.


and many thanks for the corrections or lighting up of some of those "glittering stuff"......

 

[prince.of.preslav]

Alexander, the jewels that are presented to members of the Royal Family on occasion of their weddings are their private property and they can do what they wnat with them. Such jewels do not revert to the Head of the Royal House upon their death, unless this is specified in their will. Take for example the above-mentioned fringe tiara of Princess Marina - it was a wedding present to her from the City of London (where it gets its name from), she wore it a lot and after her death it passed to her elder son - Prince Michael of Kent. Now the said tiara is worn by his wife - Princess Michael of Kent. In the case of the diamond sautoir of the late Princess Mary, Princess Mary & Countess of Harewood, it was among the jewls that were sold after her death in order to pay the heavy death duties.

Bobby

 

[JewelFreak]

in the strong room of Buckingham Palace

Alexander, that would be my idea of HEAVEN!

I think what Alexander means is that items "given" by the Queen to family members are actually loans -- like the Bow-Knot tiara Diana received as a wedding "present" but certainly with the understanding that it goes back to the Queen when no longer in use by the recipient. Right?

--- Laurie

 

[alexander1917]

in the strong room of Buckingham Palace

Alexander, that would be my idea of HEAVEN!

I think what Alexander means is that items "given" by the Queen to family members are actually loans -- like the Bow-Knot tiara Diana received as a wedding "present" but certainly with the understanding that it goes back to the Queen when no longer in use by the recipient. Right?

--- Laurie

RIGHT! exactly what I mean.
because I couldn't image that f.e. Queen Mary with her much work of collecting, and re-assembly of items from jewels to funiture, it couln't her will that later all broke up again.
I remember to read in her biography that she f.e. re assmbled a sitting group and relocated it to a room in Windosr - were it belongs, but over generation splitted in some other homes.
and the many label (also of jewels cases) in her own writing, what it contained, received from whom and so on. She gave all her children a parure with connection of the "old court" to remind them of their long living family. Could it in he rmind, that later generations sold those? I can't imagine. I think there is a unofficial agreement that those importent item return to the Sovereign - and that's the only way to save the death duties. especial for items with a great historic background.

and this is also the point, why Diana had to return those items like the Lover's knot. - isn't it also the same procedure with the statues of the Academy Awards? returning after death......

sorry for some complicated description, but i'm not a native speaker.

 

[prince.of.preslav]

But Alexander, Imagine for example the Gloucester jewels from Queen Mary that were wedding presents to Lady Alice. According to what you say, they should be returned to HM, as head of the family, after the deaths of the present Duke and Duchess. But they will not, because as the wedding prsents from Queen Mary, they were the private property of Princess Alice for ever and ever. Thus her (grand-)children are free to offer these jewels to the open market some day. I would only be a gesture on their part if they offer them to the head of the RF frirst, because of the historical/family importance of these jewels. If I owned such jewels from my family, I'd not give to the head of my family just like that. I's want him to pay me. I'd not care if a collection is cept intact or not. Take another example - the Kent sapphire tiara - a wedding presen to Princess Marina from Queen Mary, a jewel from the old court, which was sold after the death of Princess Marina. Of course Queen Mary has probably hoped that her gifts would remain with her descendants, but that's something we cannot know.
Diana's jewels - they were her gifts, her property. In the divorce settlement, however, it was agreed that that she can keep them with some provisos. After her death, they were returned to BP's vaults for safe keeping and waiting for the wives of the Princess Williamand Hanry. And even if we regard her jewels as long term loans from the Queen, it is a bit different than the case with the Gloucester and Kent jewels - Diana was expected to become Queen some day and her gems were to revert to the main line of the family.

Bobby

 

[JewelFreak]

True, Bobby. I didn't realize Diana's RF jewels were part of the divorce settlement, interesting. I think I was wrong when I termed the Bow-Knot tiara a loan; it was really a gift, then. Immaterial because at the time HM expected it would stay in the same line of the family. It's easy to get confused -- seems that sometimes the Queen does lend stuff to family members, as the choker w/the diamond clasp that Diana wore only once, that I've ever seen pics of. It's always described as a loan. Just like any mother-in-law might do (although a heck of a lot more luxe!). But the monarch does give pieces to sons & daughters, as the Gloucester parure you mentioned or Victoria's little sapphire crown, now w/the Harewoods (my favorite). I presume anything given to Sophie will go to Edward's & her children & on down that line. Okay, got it!

--- Laurie

 

[prince.of.preslav]

Yes, the Lover's Knot tiara, among other jewels from Diana's in-laws, was part of the divorce settlement. Diana was allowed to keep them, but couldn't sell or loan them to other people. They returned to BP only after her death.
Yes, the Queen lends jewels to family members, but to members of her immediate family. It's not as if the Duchesses of Gloucester and Kent would borrow jewels from the collection of Elizabeth II. I think that by far Her Majesty has lend jewels only to Diana and Camilla, both Princess of Wales by marriage - necklaces, chokers, brooches and earrings. Maybe in the future we can see The Queen's grand-daughters with some forgotten goodies on loan from Granny...
Btw, Sophie Wessex got the most historically important tiara from Elizabeth and Philip's daughters-in-law. Hers was part of QV's regal circlet and later the elements were used as a brooch fitting for the Koh-i-Noor by Queens Victoria, Alexandra and Mary.

Bobby

 

[LadyMaria]

Crown Princess Mary at the 500th anniversary celebration of the Danish Navy. Looks to me like she opted for jewels on her dress...all I see otherwise is the earrings. Don't get me wrong, I like the dress a lot! But you know what really gets me? She's three months pregnant with twins and is still skinnier than I am!

 

[JewelFreak]

I saw in Vanity Fair magazine today that Crown Princess Mary has been named to the Best Dressed List this year. They should have added Best-Jeweled!

--- Laurie

 

[T L]

I saw in Vanity Fair magazine today that Crown Princess Mary has been named to the Best Dressed List this year. They should have added Best-Jeweled!

--- Laurie

She is quite an elegant lady, and I love her style. Of course, after she has the twins, she'll be a size 2 in about two weeks.

 

[LadyMaria]

Formal portrait of the Princess Royal for her 60th birthday. I hope I look half this good when I'm 60. It's nice to see her dressed up for a change and oddly enough, I think the color looks good on her. I think she's wearing the Festoon tiara that Autumn Phillips wore for the wedding as a tiara.

 

[alexander1917]

Yes, the Lover's Knot tiara, among other jewels from Diana's in-laws, was part of the divorce settlement. Diana was allowed to keep them, but couldn't sell or loan them to other people. They returned to BP only after her death.
Yes, the Queen lends jewels to family members, but to members of her immediate family. It's not as if the Duchesses of Gloucester and Kent would borrow jewels from the collection of Elizabeth II. I think that by far Her Majesty has lend jewels only to Diana and Camilla, both Princess of Wales by marriage - necklaces, chokers, brooches and earrings. Maybe in the future we can see The Queen's grand-daughters with some forgotten goodies on loan from Granny...
Btw, Sophie Wessex got the most historically important tiara from Elizabeth and Philip's daughters-in-law. Hers was part of QV's regal circlet and later the elements were used as a brooch fitting for the Koh-i-Noor by Queens Victoria, Alexandra and Mary.

Bobby

HM lent also some items to Princess Anne,

very nice photo for her 60ths, she doesn't looked that age

 

[JewelFreak]

One queen with amazing jewelry is Lalla Salma of Morocco, though her title is Princess, not Queen. She's the first Moroccan consort to have a title at all & is a very interesting woman. She & the king have 2 kids. Lalla Salma was a commoner, daughter of a schoolteacher. She has an advanced degree in science. Unlike former consorts she lives a public life -- does a lot of work for AIDS societies & cancer, all international. She & Queen Rania are apparently good friends -- have a lot in common. Lalla Salma's jewelry collection is endless! Here's a sampling.

--- Laurie

 

[JewelFreak]

Here are earrings.

 

[JewelFreak]

More earrings.

 

[JewelFreak]

Belts, Wow! (Not to mention gigantic diamonds!)

 

[JewelFreak]

And other beautiful things.

 

[JewelFreak]

Not finished yet!!

 

[JewelFreak]

Amythists, yes?

 

[JewelFreak]

And more emeralds, again with red. Not sure if this is the same necklace as above, wrapped more tightly, but do not think so.

 

[T L]

Thanks JewelFreak,
I adore her emerald earrings!!!

 

[JewelFreak]

I love the emerald & diamond collar thing, TL, but more than anything, all those jeweled belts!

--- Laurie

 

[LadyMaria]

Agreed, Lalla Salma is an amazing woman with fabulous jewlery. Her degrees are in comptuer science, and as a secondary science teacher I am always happy to see strong female role models like her in science. She is the first wife of a King of Morocco to be publically recognized before she produced a male heir!