My apologies Marc that I could not post until tonight. That little glitch did, however, give me time to rethink my initial, instinctive reply when I read your post.
My initial instinct was to take one jewel -- Queen Victoria's bow brooch, which was lent to the Duchess of York, as an example-- and then argue that the jewels had to be kept in a central location as a collection because QEII has been photographed wearing that brooch in numerous locations both in the UK and overseas.
Then, I wondered if all of HM's jewels would be kept in one central location. Would that not be akin to a normal person investing all their life savings in one particular set of shares on the stockmarket? The prevailing wisdom is that investors should spread the risk and invest in different shares. Could that be how HM's advisors see the location/s of where her jewels are stored?
I certainly don't know, and I suspect that no one outside of HM's Household officials does, but it would make sense if some jewels were stored in one place and others in another.
Having said that, there is the question of logistics. How would that be arranged? Again I don't know. But if some jewels were stored at Buckingham Palace and some at Windsor (or any other secure vaults in the region) then having jewels available at various times would not be an issue. But perhaps, as a means of long term storage, places such as Sandringham and Balmoral might be problematic for anything other than very privately worn jewels. As 9922343177 said, we don't have any verifiable evidence about what HM QEII wears in private.
When I thought about what might be kept permanently in Scotland the only jewel I could think of which is only worn in Scotland is the Braemar brooch.
291
Responses
« Back to index | View thread »