My question is, since we have a portrait of GDA wearing the tiara https://i.ibb.co/5sc7YTW/2675-B6-D9-56-AC-4-F67-9-FBD-1-C85-EC720371.jpg and a photograph of GDA wearing it as a necklace with the Cambridge Lovers Knot Tiara https://i.ibb.co/VQZ6gMg/960656-C6-C5-EB-4829-A489-EA421499-A3-A1.jpg, why do we (maybe just me) believe that QM inherited the Parure and not just the tiara. The only photo of QM that I have seen does not prove that she did not bring the suite together herself https://i.ibb.co/B4Rhr1V/19936587-0376-48-EE-9-AF0-96-E9-DE70-F54-A.jpg. GDA died in 1916, about the same time that Russian jewels flooded the market, since sapphires were very popular in Russia could she not have created the suite to complete the necklace. I am not convinced of my arguement since she gave it away after a fairly short period of ownership.
The tiara and the rest of the suite dont quite physically match each other, which assuming the alterations were fairly minor by QM they should. The clusters on the necklace are different to the tiara and I can see no scroll element which is integral to the tiara.
Tiara
https://i.ibb.co/VDcHMVf/2-B757-CF0-D06-F-461-D-8-AC4-E404-E131-EA7-B.jpg
New Tiara
https://i.ibb.co/ctYKjbC/F553-A333-4706-4-A1-D-9-BB3-B378747-A9-DFA.jpg
Want to make clear I am prepared for you to argue me down, but whould love to know what you all think.
1
Responses
« Back to index | View thread »