Why?....why would you do this...

[Hounddog]

I saw this image of a historic tiara attached to the information about how the original Emeralds had been taken out of their settings in the tiara and sold, then the spaces filled with Turquoise stones. Maybe it's me....but apart from not looking 'right', it seems almost sacrilegious! ( I hope it's OK to use that word in this context).

It's such a shame to remove the Emeralds...but why would you put turquoise in there!!

Here's what the article said...

"French Emperor Napoleon I gave this crown, originally set in emeralds, to Empress Marie-Louise on their wedding day in 1810. A French jewelry company bought the crown in the 1950s, then sold the emeralds and reset it in turquoise."

 

[boerumbiddy]

Yes, it looks awful, like asbestos siding on a historic home. Almost looks like costume jewelry now.

 

[collier]

I agree, it is almost sacrilegious and doesn't look right. The turquoise doesn't look like real turquoise, but stabilized/dyed/etc stuff. However, I think we all know why it was done, for money. The emeralds were probably what the jewelry was looking for, and sold them at a profit loose with the very desirable provenance and then used the existing tiara filled in with cheaper stones to double down on the investment. In the 1950s tiara's were not worn particularly frequently (sigh). I almost never get mine out.