Royal Jewels

[prince.of.preslav]

The other necklace you ask about is the so called ''Ruby swag necklace''. Diamond swags set in yellow gold with two big cabochon rubies in the center, presented in the 1980''s by a Middle Eastern ruler. There are matching earrings to the necklace. HM has worn it often since the 1980''s, mostly with the Burmese tiara. In 2008 it appeared twice - at Prince Charles''s 60th birthday gala and the State Visit to Turkey (pic below). The last time HM wore it in 2009 during the State banquet for the Indian president.

BTW, the hair-slides from Alexander''s picture are said to have belonged to Queen Victoria.

Hope that helps

Bobby

 

[alexander1917]

This "hair sides" are known as Queen Victoria's Wheat Ear Brooches

In 1830 King William IV ordered six brooches that could also be worn as hair ornamentes. they were made from diamonds that had belonged to his father King Georg III. In her will Queen Victoria left them to the Crown. (thats mean, all future King or Queen inherit this jewellery.)


The Ruby Swag Necklace came from the Amir of Qatar, H.M. received it in 1985.

 

[prince.of.preslav]

Thanks for the additional information, Alexander. I (wrongly) thought that Queen Victoria commissioned them. Pity that we don't see tham today. I wonder who used them first - Queen Adelaide?
Doesn't the term 'Crown Jewels' mean that these jewels are worn by successive Queens/Queens Consort, not that the future monarchs inherit them?

In the Dutch collection there is an Ears of Wheat tiara and these EoW probably have originally been brooches. Just like their British 'cousins'.

Thanks again,

Bobby

 

[alexander1917]

Date: 2/7/2010 4:20:51 PM
Author: prince.of.preslav
Thanks for the additional information, Alexander. I (wrongly) thought that Queen Victoria commissioned them. Pity that we don''t see tham today. I wonder who used them first - Queen Adelaide?
Doesn''t the term ''Crown Jewels'' mean that these jewels are worn by successive Queens/Queens Consort, not that the future monarchs inherit them?

In the Dutch collection there is an Ears of Wheat tiara and these EoW probably have originally been brooches. Just like their British ''cousins''.

Thanks again,

Bobby

As I understand the system it''s as follows

1. Crown Jewels: Crowns, Orb, Sceptre etc owned by the state

2. Jewels of the Crown: Queen Victoria''s necklace and earrings, Dehli Durbar necklace, King William IV Brooch, this ears brooches etc. inherit by the king or queen like some other value things (Balmoral, objects d''art etc) which go from generation to gerneration.

3. Private Jewels: King George VI Sapphire parure, Granny''s Tiara, Vladimir Tiara (owned by Queen, she can do with them as she wished f.e. sell them)

 

[prince.of.preslav]

I have the understanding that all jewels left by Queen Victoria + the Crowns, Orbs, Sceptre are Crown Jewels - owned by The United Kingdom - and are worn by next monarchs and their spouses.

Balmoral and Sandringham are private property of The Queen and will pass to The PoW when the time comes. They don't go with the Crown, however. Remember the George VI had to buy them from his abdicated brother Edward VIII, so that The King could have a privately owned home. And 58 years ago it passed to his Lilibet.

Then there are the private jewels - Elizabeth's wedding presents, the bulk of Queen Mary's jewels, all QEQM's jewels and many others that have been presented to HM on private and state occasions (birthdays, anniversaries, christmas, state visits, etc.). What would happen to them is entirely up to Elizabeth II to decide.

That's what I've read through the years, but of course it may not be (entirely) correct!

Bobby

 

[alexander1917]

Date: 2/7/2010 5:04:53 PM
Author: prince.of.preslav
I have the understanding that all jewels left by Queen Victoria + the Crowns, Orbs, Sceptre are Crown Jewels - owned by The United Kingdom - and are worn by next monarchs and their spouses.

Balmoral and Sandringham are private property of The Queen and will pass to The PoW when the time comes. They don't go with the Crown, however. Remember the George VI had to buy them from his abdicated brother Edward VIII, so that The King could have a privately owned home. And 58 years ago it passed to his Lilibet.

Then there are the private jewels - Elizabeth's wedding presents, the bulk of Queen Mary's jewels, all QEQM's jewels and many others that have been presented to HM on private and state occasions (birthdays, anniversaries, christmas, state visits, etc.). What would happen to them is entirely up to Elizabeth II to decide.

That's what I've read through the years, but of course it may not be (entirely) correct!

Bobby

First, there is a very large differnece between property of the state ( BP, Tower of London, Windsor, Crowns...) and property of the Crown (RC, large scale of ground)....it is held in trust for her/his successors and the nation

Of course are Balmoral and Sandringham private estates, but remember, when the PoW will inherit them he would be KING!!! and so it went through the years since Victoria bulit Balmoral and Edward Sandringham. They went always to the next sovereign.

I think there is a private "will" or agreement what happend to the Jewels. for example, Queen Mary left the bulk of her jewels (some are of historic and unique value) to the Princes Elizabeth in 1947 and later in 1953. She did'nt give it to Magret or one of her children.

The same with the Late Queen Mother.

And than we have the point of Death Dutys in Great Britain. I think a point which could also not be forgotten. Also a main point to left this private owned valuable to the sovereign, or to the RC.

I think that some items must went to the RC ( see also the website, it shows only some items, not all) because of summer opening's of BP and special exhibitions in the Queens Gallery you will find also items from the private jewel collection.

 

[prince.of.preslav]

Hi Alexander,

I usually find it not so easy to distinguish these two major kinds of properties - State property and Crown property. Now thanks to your explanation I think I'll 'draw the line' between them easily.

Of course Elizabeth got Queen Mary's jewels just because she was the monarch now and that would assure their staying with the main line and would avoid huge death duties. I'm sure, however, that the other family members got something small with santimental value. We just don't know which ones.
Of course Charles will only get the two estates when he's King. Did I say something else?

There is something else I am not quite sure about - the jewels from the RC - What I understand/hope is that that they're exhibiting them, because more people will be interested in the exhibition and thus more money will be collected from tickets, but the jewels are still Elizabeth II's. Anyway, I know I'm not the most reliable person on this subject...and we've discussed this topic before here.

Bobby

 

[prince.of.preslav]

Two days ago I thought how nice it would be if The Queen wore her sapphire chrysanthemum brooch more often... and she wore it en route to the Sandringham Estate in Norfolk.

BTW, having in mind the weather in London, I can say that HM must be a brave lady wearing such coat and shoes and a tiny headscarf...

 

[alexander1917]

Date: 2/8/2010 11:44:52 AM
Author: prince.of.preslav
Hi Alexander,

I usually find it not so easy to distinguish these two major kinds of properties - State property and Crown property. Now thanks to your explanation I think I''ll ''draw the line'' between them easily.

Of course Elizabeth got Queen Mary''s jewels just because she was the monarch now and that would assure their staying with the main line and would avoid huge death duties. I''m sure, however, that the other family members got something small with santimental value. We just don''t know which ones.
Of course Charles will only get the two estates when he''s King. Did I say something else?

There is something else I am not quite sure about - the jewels from the RC - What I understand/hope is that that they''re exhibiting them, because more people will be interested in the exhibition and thus more money will be collected from tickets, but the jewels are still Elizabeth II''s. Anyway, I know I''m not the most reliable person on this subject...and we''ve discussed this topic before here.

Bobby

I read somewhere.. -forgot in wich case or book- that the RC is trusted by the sovereign for the next generations. Items from the RC "must" go to exhibit. I suppose this is the main point why we could se recently in London jewels from the monarch during summer openings of BP. I didn''t think that they do it for rising more tickets, because the RC is a very unique colection of arts.

for example Margret inherit from Queen Mary some very nice pieces which were sold during the auction recently. but the historic tourquiouses stay in the family.

 

[prince.of.preslav]

Well, I think that people (esp. women) have always been fascinated by royal jewels and that's why I suggested that the RC with the kind cooperation of HM The Queen exhibited some of her private jewles, mainly wedding and coronation/Durbar gifts. I haven't visited Buckingham Palace, but as far as I know, there are jewels like the Timur ruby necklace that are 'owned' by the collection and is often ecxhibited.
That's pure speculation, of course...

Queen Mary's turquoise parure is now with the Gloucesters. The parure Princess Margeret recived was orriginaly a wedding gift to Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon from King George V and was newly acquired
I think that not all jewels from Queen Mary were sold. IIRC a brooch with large cabochon sapphire wasn't auctioned and probably we'll never know what Margaret actually got from Granny.

Bobby

 

[alexander1917]

Date: 2/9/2010 11:49:32 AM
Author: prince.of.preslav
Well, I think that people (esp. women) have always been fascinated by royal jewels and that''s why I suggested that the RC with the kind cooperation of HM The Queen exhibited some of her private jewles, mainly wedding and coronation/Durbar gifts. I haven''t visited Buckingham Palace, but as far as I know, there are jewels like the Timur ruby necklace that are ''owned'' by the collection and is often ecxhibited.
That''s pure speculation, of course...

Queen Mary''s turquoise parure is now with the Gloucesters. The parure Princess Margeret recived was orriginaly a wedding gift to Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon from King George V and was newly acquired
I think that not all jewels from Queen Mary were sold. IIRC a brooch with large cabochon sapphire wasn''t auctioned and probably we''ll never know what Margaret actually got from Granny.

Bobby

That''s a moin point of the RC jewels, that they have to be on diplay from time to time. they see them not as private Jewels, but as a trust of National Inheritance.
Oh, there are every year special displays of gems. sometimes also noted at the website of the RC.

Queen Mary inherit the turquioses, later completed the parure, and than diparted into 2 sets on for Gloucester one for Queen Mother (Margret).

 

[prince.of.preslav]

Do you have a source for the theory that Queen Mary owned the two parures? Who did she inherit them from?
From what I''ve read, the parure she gave Lady Alice (Duchess of Gloucester) was a wedding present to Mary herself from her parents in 1893.
The one Lady Elizabeth received was her father-in-law''s wedding present. She in turn gave it to her daughter Margaret.

Here is a photo from an old newspaper (1923) of the York turquoise parure and a bow brooch (now worn by Camilla) saying The King''s gift.

 

[Josefine]

new photos at the swedish court webbsite

 

[Josefine]

the queen

 

[Josefine]

and madeleine

 

[Josefine]

silvia with the king

 

[prince.of.preslav]

Thanks for the pictures, Josefine. Any idea when were they taken?
It''s nice to see a change for the good on the RF''s website.

Bobby

 

[prince.of.preslav]

Tonight (11 Feb. 2010) TM King Carl XVI Gustaf and Queen Silvia hosted a Representationsmiddag* at the Royal Palace, Stockholm. HRH the Crown Princess also attended.
HM wore the small necklace, the earrings and the big brooch of the amethyst parure and the Connaught tiara. Crown Princess Victoria wore the Baden fringe tiara on her head and a pendant on a chain around her neck.

* Does Representationsmiddag mean Representation dinner? Josefine?

 

[prince.of.preslav]

Taday HRH The Duchess of Cornwall attended a reception before a charity Anna Valentine fashion show at the Royal Courts of Justice. The Duchess wore her diamond serpent necklace and peamond/pearl earrings:

 

[prince.of.preslav]

GettyImages also provides us with a nice close-up of the necklace:

 

[Josefine]

you are correct Representation dinner it is
strange to wear thr pendent in such smal chain
is there any larger photos?

 

[Josefine]

i found a larger photo

 

[Josefine]

princess christina were also there

 

[Josefine]

here is one more of victoria and silvia

 

[Josefine]

Date: 2/10/2010 5:30:57 AM
Author: Josefine
new photos at the swedish court webbsite

on page 150 you can see a the same photo but more of the dress and a bracelet

 

[prince.of.preslav]

Thank you Josefine for the transation and the larger photos!

The diamond and pearl pendant was last worn by Princess Madeleine at the second night of last year''s Nobel celebrations. Personaly, I think that wearing it with a riviere was a better choice. It can also be worn as a brooch. I think The Queen wore the amethyst necklace ''back to front'' like The Crown Princess did at The Nobel prices gala last year.

I also found that this dinner was attended ''by representatives from the diplomatic corps, the Swedish parliament, the government, counties and authorities, as well as representatives from the Swedish business community, science, culture and sport'' (courtesy RoyalCourt.se). And that Queen Silvia''s dress is from 1991.

Bobby

Princess Madeleine wearing Princess Victoria''s diamond earrings and the diamond and pearl pendant from last night on a diamond riviere at the Nobel Day after dinner in 2009:

 

[alexander1917]

Date: 2/9/2010 6:25:21 PM
Author: prince.of.preslav
Do you have a source for the theory that Queen Mary owned the two parures? Who did she inherit them from?
From what I''ve read, the parure she gave Lady Alice (Duchess of Gloucester) was a wedding present to Mary herself from her parents in 1893.
The one Lady Elizabeth received was her father-in-law''s wedding present. She in turn gave it to her daughter Margaret.

Here is a photo from an old newspaper (1923) of the York turquoise parure and a bow brooch (now worn by Camilla) saying The King''s gift.

As I said before. Queen Mary inherited one part from her mother. Later she received from her father some other parts in turquoises as wedding present in 1893. Over the years the other drop necklace was added. this assembly was in about 1900. So Queen Mary could part this set into two parures. one went to the Duchess of York (wedding gift from George V in 1923) the second went to the Duchess of Gloucester in 1935.
written sources found at Field, Pope-Hennesy.

 

[prince.of.preslav]

Thank you, Alexander!
Seems that Queen Mary was more fortunate than I tought she was... Do you know how the Gloucesters got the second turquoise and diamond necklace?
One thing I like about this site is that we can learn something new about past and present royals' jewels every time we visit.

Bobby

 

[alexander1917]

I think every present status is a caused past.
I din''t know when Queen Mary get the second necklace, must be around 1900. it may could be the one - or altered - that Alber designed for Victoria. Or it was a gift. you know Mary mixed ( of course separeted for kind of stone), altered, and redesigned her jewellery...I also could think of a picture wearing it. But as she dresses EVERY DAY in a evening gown with tiara for diner, so she had also some, we never seen anymore. it would be so fantastic to read her day-to-day book.

 

[prince.of.preslav]

Thanks for the kind reply, Alexander.
I've tried to imagine how Queen Mary looked during dinners and I always tought it's a pity that there weren't any photos (it's understandable, of course). Imagine all the jewels she has worn worn and that have not seen the sunlight from decades...

Back to my question - I call this The second turquise and diamond necklace. If you look at it you'll see that it's quite different from the wedding gift necklace. The earrings and brooch(es) are the same, thougt. Any guesses where it might've came from?