Royal Jewels

[prince.of.preslav]

I hope you remember our discusion about chokers in the British Royal Family from the previous page. Pictures of QEII wearing one are rare, so I was surprised when I saw this one. Any gueses where the jewel comes from? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it the third choker HM has worn? Sorry for the poor quality, but if anyone knows the date or at least the year I can try to find a better image. Thanks in advance.

Bobby

 

[AGBF]

Date: 5/29/2009 4:54:13 PM
Author: prince.of.preslav

I hope you remember our discusion about chokers in the British Royal Family from the previous page. Pictures of QEII wearing one are rare, so I was surprised when I saw this one. Any gueses where the jewel comes from? Correct me if I''m wrong, but isn''t it the third choker HM has worn? Sorry for the poor quality, but if anyone knows the date or at least the year I can try to find a better image. Thanks in advance.

I don''t know anything about the choker, Bobby, although I may look if I have time. I just want to compliment you on your find! You actually managed to find Queen Elizabeth in the kind of collar necklace you had wanted to see her wear! That''s a great find!

AGBF

 

[AGBF]

Well...I said I might try to find out more about the collar that Queen Elizabeth was wearing in the photo Bobby posted, but the Internet is a strange place. One starts to look for one thing and finds other things along the way. I stumbled upon a website with some information about Queen Alexandra and some photographs of her that I do not believe have yet been posted in this thread. The website states that she wore the collar-style necklaces to hide a scar that was supposed to have been from some childhood surgery. The information did not sound definitive, however.

AGBF

 

[AGBF]

Here is another photograph from the site. Queen Alexandra had six children: Albert Victor, George, Louise, Victoria, Maud, and John. Two of her daughters, Louise and Victoria, are pictured here with her.

AGBF

 

[AGBF]

This is a photograph of Queen Alexandra at her coronation.


AGBF

 

[Imdanny]

Hi, everyone! Thanks for the new pictures! Hi, Bobby! Thanks for the link! I'll try to come up with some new material and I'll post again soon. Until then.

 

[loriken214]

Date: 5/29/2009 9:47:03 PM
Author: AGBF



This is a photograph of Queen Alexandra at her coronation.


AGBF

WOW...I love Queen Alexandra...thank you for posting this amazing photo Deb!!!

Lori

 

[loriken214]

What''s up with Queen Elizabeth not being invited to France to celebrate D-Day?

Lori

 

[prince.of.preslav]

Hi, everybody!

Thank you all for the support. I''m doing my best.

Thank you, Deb for the link and the lovely pictures of Queen Alexandra. This woman, a real trandsetter, deserve our big Thank you for some of the most beautiful and precious jewels in the British and Norwegian jewellery collections. I hope that they won''t collect dust under BP, and would be proudly worn by the new jeneration and their wives

Now about QEII''s necklace - Do you HM wears this jewel from Dianas collection? It is strange that HM would borrow jewels, as she is the one that lends them to the other royal ladies, but since it is the only time I''ve seen them both with such similar necklaces - Why not?

Bobby

 

[jewelerman]

Date: 5/28/2009 9:34:49 AM
Author: prince.of.preslav

Date: 5/28/2009 6:55:12 AM
Author: AdiS

Date: 5/27/2009 11:41:43 PM

Author: AGBF

Date: 5/27/2009 7:11:04 PM

Author: Imdanny



In the US we use the word ''titular'' as a stand in for ''real.'' Eg. ''So and so is the titular head of the whatever it''s called political party.'' It does not imply that the person has an office when used this way, only that the person is the ''real'' head of that party.

I hope that we can have a good natured discussion about words, Danny, because they are my true love. I truly prize language above diamonds and gold and enjoy discussions about grammar and syntax more than discussions about jewelry!


It is my belief that the word, ''titular'' means ''in title''. (I have not looked this up.) If someone is the ''titular'' head of The Riverside Quilters League, then she is the nominal head of that group. She is the head according to title. She holds the title. She is the one who is called, ''President of The Riverside Quilters League''. Whether she is the real head of The Riverside Quilters league is another question altogether. Because in English being called, ''the titular head'' carries with it the implication that one is only the titular head of something and not someone who holds real power. In English the use of the word ''titular'' usually implies that the person holds an office in name (or title) only.


Bobby used the word titular in this description: ''TM The King & The Queen of Bulgaria (titular)''. That makes sense to me, because their majesties the King and Queen of Bulgaria are King and Queen of Bulgaria in name only. They do not actually rule Bulgaria nor are they formally or legally recognized by Bulgaria in any way.




AGBF

Spot on.

Prince Kardam for example (the eldest son of Tsar Simeon II) is sometimes styled as if being a crown prince by courtesy only. That''s the situation with his parents as well.

On a different note, I am glad Kardam is feeling better after the car accident and I wish him a full and speedy recovery!

Hi, Danny!

I hope Deb''s posts made it clearer to you what TITULAR means when it comes to non ruling kings, grand dukes, etc. For further information you can check the Wikipedia article about Titular ruler.

I''m glad that the Prince of Turnovo is feeling better now and wish him to recover quickly.
Talking about Prince Karadam, here is a picure of him and his wife Princess Miriam with her wedding tiara and a big necklace with big stones. Do you know what the stones in the jewel are?

At first I thought the settings were large pink conch pearls...then cameos...Im thinkin carved coral...possibly victorian in age.

 

[prince.of.preslav]

"At first I thought the settings were large pink conch pearls...then cameos...Im thinkin carved coral...possibly victorian in age."

Hi, jewelerman and thank you for you response! From that picture it is hard to tell what the Princess wears, but I'' ve seen a closer and bigger one where you can see the necklace and the stones don''t look like cameos or conch pearls. About the large pink conch pearls - well, I don''t know much about them, but aren''t they smaller? Pearls of that size... Most acceptable for me is that this is a new jewel created with large cabochon corals.

 

[prince.of.preslav]

Date: 5/30/2009 3:08:06 AM
Author: loriken214
What''s up with Queen Elizabeth not being invited to France to celebrate D-Day?


Lori

It''s strange that Queen Elizabeth wasn''t invited, because, as you know she is the only current Head of state that surved in the war, and it was Her father''s troops that took part in the war. Instead of HM Prime Minister Godon Brown will represent the UK at the celebrations. The French governement''s spokesman Luc Chatel said that QEII was "absolutely welcome if she wanted to come" and that the ceremony is about the US-French relationship and there will be other D-Days.

Bobby

 

[joelly]

Date: 4/12/2009 1:47:46 AM
Author: Imdanny

Date: 4/12/2009 1:40:19 AM
Author: loriken214

Date: 4/11/2009 9:21:20 PM

Author: Sithathoriunet

and a few rare pics of our people''s princess, diana...lovely diana...

Diana is my angel....she passed away on my birthday.

Lori

Lori, here''s a picture for you. I hope you like it.

Lori,
She passed away on my birthday too. I will always remember that day as long as I live. We were having a lunch party for my birthday and the TV starts to announce her death. I am still in Indonesia at the time, got the news that afternoon, 8/31/97. It was my 21st birthday. I was eating my favourite dish which starts to lose its taste. My mom and I were in total shock.
I attended her wake (I think thats what it called) in the British Embassy in Jakarta. The queue of people who wanted to attend this was like four blocks from the Embassy. Such a great elegant lady. I miss seeing her. God, she was so beautiful and kind and generous. I brought her flowers. Love and miss her. I haven''t seen anyone like her since.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 5/31/2009 6:21:49 AM
Author: prince.of.preslav

Date: 5/30/2009 3:08:06 AM
Author: loriken214

What's up with Queen Elizabeth not being invited to France to celebrate D-Day?

It's strange that Queen Elizabeth wasn't invited, because, as you know she is the only current Head of state that surved in the war, and it was Her father's troops that took part in the war.

In my opinion Monsieur Sarkozy deliberately snubbed the Queen in an unforgivable and wholly characteristic attempt to upstage her and the English. I think that M. Sarkozy is beneath contempt.

Here is an excerpt from an article in, "The New York Times" about the snub to Queen Elizabeth.

May 28, 2009
Left Out of D-Day Events, Queen Elizabeth Is Fuming
By JOHN F. BURNS
LONDON — Queen Elizabeth is not amused.

"Indeed, she is decidedly displeased, angry even, that she was not invited to join President Obama and France’s president, Nicolas Sarkozy, next week at commemorations of the 65th anniversary of the D-Day landings in Normandy, according to reports published in Britain’s mass-circulation tabloid newspapers on Wednesday. Pointedly, Buckingham Palace did not deny the reports.

The queen, who is 83, is the only living head of state who served in uniform during World War II. As Elizabeth Windsor, service number 230873, she volunteered as a subaltern in the Women’s Auxiliary Territorial Service, training as a driver and a mechanic. Eventually, she drove military trucks in support roles in England.

While serving, she met the supreme Allied commander for the D-Day landings, Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, and developed a fondness for him, according to several biographies. This prompted Queen Elizabeth, who was crowned in June 1953, to say in later years that he was the American president with whom she felt most at ease.

But on June 6, when Mr. Obama and Mr. Sarkozy attend commemorations at the iconic locations associated with the American D-Day assault — Utah Beach, the town of Ste.-Mère-Église, where the first United States paratroopers landed, and the American war cemetery at Colleville-sur-Mer — the highest-ranking British representative will be Prime Minister Gordon Brown. His main role will be at ceremonies at the town of Arromanches, near the beaches where British troops landed.

How the queen came to be excluded has become entangled in a thicket of diplomatic missteps, or misunderstandings, depending on whether the account is given in London or Paris. The French have said officially that they regard the commemorations in the American sector of the landings as 'primarily a Franco-American ceremony,' and that it was up to the British to decide who should represent Britain — in other words, that Mr. Brown was at fault for not seeking an invitation for the queen.

(snip)

In Britain, commentators have suggested that Mr. Sarkozy did not want to share the telegenic moment when he hosts Mr. Obama. This was all the more so, the British commentators have said, because the queen’s presence might risk turning the occasion into a celebration of the Anglo-American alliance, whose troops carried out the landings, losing about 37,000 men in the battle for Normandy.

When accounts of the dispute made the headlines of the British tabloids on Wednesday, the diplomatic gloves came off, at least a bit. 'Palace fury at D-Day snub to the queen,' roared The Daily Mail, the first time in days that its front-page splash has been on something besides the furor over parliamentarians’ expenses. A Buckingham Palace spokesman declined to comment beyond a terse statement that 'no invitation has been issued as yet to any member of the royal family.'

(snip)

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: May 30, 2009
An article on Thursday about Queen Elizabeth’s reported displeasure over not being invited to next week’s 65th anniversary celebrations of the D-Day Allied invasion referred incorrectly to the role of French troops in the landings. While their numbers were relatively few, they did participate; it was not an event in which they 'played no part.' (A 177-man unit of French marines led by Commandant Philippe Kieffer, informally known as the Kieffer Commando, landed on Sword Beach on the morning of June 6, 1944, and 35 French paratroopers were airdropped in Brittany the same day, with hundreds more airdropped in following days.)"

AGBF

 

[chrono]

Date: 5/29/2009 2:22:33 PM
Author: bebe
<<<Talking about Prince Karadam, here is a picure of him and his wife Princess Miriam with her wedding tiara and a big necklace with big stones. Do you know what the stones in the jewel are? >>>

Those stones look like they might be Angel Skin or Coral something or the other !!

Yup, that would be my guess too: angel skin coral or some other kind of coral. But I''ve never seen any that huge!

 

[chrono]

Deb,
Thank you so much for pictures of Queen Alexandra and her daughters. I love the royal jewels and period clothing.

Bobby,
I do believe that''s the first picture I''ve seen of Queen EII wearing a choker. I''d love to be able to see it more clearly.

 

[Imdanny]

http://www.etoile.co.uk/Columns/RoyalScribe/050214.html

Article about Alexandra and Mary worth reading.

 

[prince.of.preslav]

Date: 5/31/2009 11:36:57 PM
Author: Chrono
Deb,

Thank you so much for pictures of Queen Alexandra and her daughters. I love the royal jewels and period clothing.


Bobby,

I do believe that's the first picture I've seen of Queen EII wearing a choker. I'd love to be able to see it more clearly.

Hi, Chrono! Here is a picture especially for you! Queen Elizabeth II wore the 4 row pearl choker with a diamond clasp. Two other rows of pearls can be added to the choker as well. As far as I remember the pearls used in the necklace are family property so maybe some of Queen Mary's large pearls strands was broken. This piece was loaned to Diana, Princess of Wales for the Dutch state visit.

 

[prince.of.preslav]

Date: 6/1/2009 3:10:21 AM
Author: Imdanny
http://www.etoile.co.uk/Columns/RoyalScribe/050214.html


Article about Alexandra and Mary worth reading.

Thank you, Danny for the link. It was really worth reading the article.
Now when I think I can''t remember seeing Queen Mary in her mother-in-law''s jewels. Only some of the collet necklaces and the pearl and diamond wedding brooch, maybe?

 

[bebe]

Date: 5/29/2009 4:37:35 PM
Author: prince.of.preslav

Date: 5/29/2009 2:22:33 PM
Author: bebe
<<<Talking about Prince Karadam, here is a picure of him and his wife Princess Miriam with her wedding tiara and a big necklace with big stones. Do you know what the stones in the jewel are? >>>


Those stones look like they might be Angel Skin or Coral something or the other !!

Thanks for the response, bebe. I was thinking about corals but wasn''t sure. I haven''t heard about that Angel Skin stone, is it a kind of coral?

coral angel skin earrings courtesy of Lang Antiques

 

[loriken214]

Date: 5/31/2009 6:21:49 AM
Author: prince.of.preslav

Date: 5/30/2009 3:08:06 AM
Author: loriken214
What''s up with Queen Elizabeth not being invited to France to celebrate D-Day?


Lori

It''s strange that Queen Elizabeth wasn''t invited, because, as you know she is the only current Head of state that surved in the war, and it was Her father''s troops that took part in the war. Instead of HM Prime Minister Godon Brown will represent the UK at the celebrations. The French governement''s spokesman Luc Chatel said that QEII was ''absolutely welcome if she wanted to come'' and that the ceremony is about the US-French relationship and there will be other D-Days.

Bobby

Lori

 

[loriken214]

Date: 5/31/2009 9:26:24 PM
Author: joelly

Date: 4/12/2009 1:47:46 AM
Author: Imdanny

Date: 4/12/2009 1:40:19 AM
Author: loriken214

Date: 4/11/2009 9:21:20 PM

Author: Sithathoriunet

and a few rare pics of our people''s princess, diana...lovely diana...

Diana is my angel....she passed away on my birthday.

Lori

Lori, here''s a picture for you. I hope you like it.

Lori,
She passed away on my birthday too. I will always remember that day as long as I live. We were having a lunch party for my birthday and the TV starts to announce her death. I am still in Indonesia at the time, got the news that afternoon, 8/31/97. It was my 21st birthday. I was eating my favourite dish which starts to lose its taste. My mom and I were in total shock.
I attended her wake (I think thats what it called) in the British Embassy in Jakarta. The queue of people who wanted to attend this was like four blocks from the Embassy. Such a great elegant lady. I miss seeing her. God, she was so beautiful and kind and generous. I brought her flowers. Love and miss her. I haven''t seen anyone like her since.

Joelly,

I cried for days....she truly was the People''s Princess and will never be replaced. I still miss her and celebrate her on my birthday, too.

Lori

 

[prince.of.preslav]

Thanks again, bebe! As I said earlier I haven''t heard of that stone and it''s nice to see an example. Thank you again! I realy appreciate your replies to my messages.

Bobby

 

[loriken214]

Date: 5/31/2009 11:17:22 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 5/31/2009 6:21:49 AM
Author: prince.of.preslav

Date: 5/30/2009 3:08:06 AM
Author: loriken214

What''s up with Queen Elizabeth not being invited to France to celebrate D-Day?

It''s strange that Queen Elizabeth wasn''t invited, because, as you know she is the only current Head of state that surved in the war, and it was Her father''s troops that took part in the war.

In my opinion Monsieur Sarkozy deliberately snubbed the Queen in an unforgivable and wholly characteristic attempt to upstage her and the English. I think that M. Sarkozy is beneath contempt.

Here is an excerpt from an article in, ''The New York Times'' about the snub to Queen Elizabeth.

May 28, 2009
Left Out of D-Day Events, Queen Elizabeth Is Fuming
By JOHN F. BURNS
LONDON — Queen Elizabeth is not amused.

''Indeed, she is decidedly displeased, angry even, that she was not invited to join President Obama and France’s president, Nicolas Sarkozy, next week at commemorations of the 65th anniversary of the D-Day landings in Normandy, according to reports published in Britain’s mass-circulation tabloid newspapers on Wednesday. Pointedly, Buckingham Palace did not deny the reports.

The queen, who is 83, is the only living head of state who served in uniform during World War II. As Elizabeth Windsor, service number 230873, she volunteered as a subaltern in the Women’s Auxiliary Territorial Service, training as a driver and a mechanic. Eventually, she drove military trucks in support roles in England.

While serving, she met the supreme Allied commander for the D-Day landings, Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, and developed a fondness for him, according to several biographies. This prompted Queen Elizabeth, who was crowned in June 1953, to say in later years that he was the American president with whom she felt most at ease.

But on June 6, when Mr. Obama and Mr. Sarkozy attend commemorations at the iconic locations associated with the American D-Day assault — Utah Beach, the town of Ste.-Mère-Église, where the first United States paratroopers landed, and the American war cemetery at Colleville-sur-Mer — the highest-ranking British representative will be Prime Minister Gordon Brown. His main role will be at ceremonies at the town of Arromanches, near the beaches where British troops landed.

How the queen came to be excluded has become entangled in a thicket of diplomatic missteps, or misunderstandings, depending on whether the account is given in London or Paris. The French have said officially that they regard the commemorations in the American sector of the landings as ''primarily a Franco-American ceremony,'' and that it was up to the British to decide who should represent Britain — in other words, that Mr. Brown was at fault for not seeking an invitation for the queen.

(snip)

In Britain, commentators have suggested that Mr. Sarkozy did not want to share the telegenic moment when he hosts Mr. Obama. This was all the more so, the British commentators have said, because the queen’s presence might risk turning the occasion into a celebration of the Anglo-American alliance, whose troops carried out the landings, losing about 37,000 men in the battle for Normandy.

When accounts of the dispute made the headlines of the British tabloids on Wednesday, the diplomatic gloves came off, at least a bit. ''Palace fury at D-Day snub to the queen,'' roared The Daily Mail, the first time in days that its front-page splash has been on something besides the furor over parliamentarians’ expenses. A Buckingham Palace spokesman declined to comment beyond a terse statement that ''no invitation has been issued as yet to any member of the royal family.''

(snip)

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: May 30, 2009
An article on Thursday about Queen Elizabeth’s reported displeasure over not being invited to next week’s 65th anniversary celebrations of the D-Day Allied invasion referred incorrectly to the role of French troops in the landings. While their numbers were relatively few, they did participate; it was not an event in which they ''played no part.'' (A 177-man unit of French marines led by Commandant Philippe Kieffer, informally known as the Kieffer Commando, landed on Sword Beach on the morning of June 6, 1944, and 35 French paratroopers were airdropped in Brittany the same day, with hundreds more airdropped in following days.)''

AGBF

PATHETIC.....you would think something like this would be easy to fix, but NO!

Thank you Deb!

Lori

 

[Imdanny]

Hi, everyone! The last I heard is that Gordon Brown extended an invitation to "any member of the Royal Family who wants to attend." That's pretty lukewarm! They should have invited the Queen, end of story. There were many UK veterans interviewed who said that they had fought for "Queen and country," that they wanted her to be there with them, and that they might not get another chance. Terrible.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/2/2009 12:15:07 AM
Author: Imdanny

Hi, everyone! The last I heard is that Gordon Brown extended an invitation to 'any member of the Royal Family who wants to attend.' That's pretty lukewarm! They should have invited the Queen, end of story. There were many UK veterans interviewed who said that they had fought for 'Queen and country,' that they wanted her to be there with them, and that they might not get another chance. Terrible.

I am with you, Danny. Although I am not British, the United States, my country, is involved in this celebration. To paraphrase "The Godfather", I am taking this real personal. I wonder if we should barrage the White House with protests and ask that Barack Obama boycott the ceremonies given that the Queen was not invited. I am serious. And I support President Obama. I just think he should hear from us.

PS- I rethought this. The British-actually UK-people could be calling for Gordon Brown to boycott the ceremonies if that was their will. It is not really our place to interfere in their domestic matters. I just got worked up thinking of the veterans you mentioned. I need to cool off.

Deb/AGBF

 

[prince.of.preslav]

Prince of Wales to attend 65th D-Day anniversary

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/2/2009 6:01:24 PM
Author: prince.of.preslav

Prince of Wales to attend 65th D-Day anniversary

Thanks for posting the news that the Prince of Wales will attend to represent the Queen. Certainly Gordon Brown could have effected this invitation yet did not. It was left to President Obama to do so. I am sure that that speaks to the tenor of the relationship between the government and the Royal Family in the UK now, but I am not sure how. I have read about the widespread popular dissatisfaction with government in Great Britain, most recently evidenced by the forced resignation of the Speaker of Parliament. I am not sure if this dissatisfaction in some way influenced Mr. Brown not to intercede on behalf of the Queen. Not being British or in Britain it is hard to know. Perhaps some of our British members can give us their opinions...without getting into a discussion of politics!

AGBF

 

[Imdanny]

http://www.marileecody.com/eliz1-images.html

"Elizabeth I: The Armada Portrait, c1588, unknown artist. Another version of this portrait can be viewed at the NPG; however, it has been cut at the sides.
Click here to view it. Symbolism is rife in this famous image, of which there are three versions. Once again, pearls - symbolic of purity - decorate the queen's head and gown. Next to her right arm is an imperial crown, and her right hand rests upon a globe - specifically, her fingers rest upon the Americas.

In 1587, a year before this portrait was made, the first English child was born at the English settlement in Virginia. The crown and globe tell us that Elizabeth is mistress of land and sea.

In the background of the painting are scenes from the defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588. It was the pivotal event of the latter half of Elizabeth's reign and a great triumph for the English."

The queen is wearing a pearl necklace given to her by the earl of Leicester; it was Robert Dudley's last gift to the queen."

 

[prince.of.preslav]

Hi, Danny!
Hi, everyone!

Thanks for the portrait of Elizabeth I! HM is known for wearing wigs and baroque pearls sticked in her hair (either real or fake), but here HM also wears a head ornament with greenish stones. So do you or anyother of the members of Pricescope knows when tiaras started to be worn? And another question - Four of the 273 pearls in the Imperial State Crown were in possesion of Elizabeth I. In the pocture you posted four baroque pearls are shown hanging from the upper part of her gown - can this pearls be the ones in the Crown?
Here is an early painting of the crown where you can see one of the big baroque pearls: