Interesting topic. I like this tiara, lovely, beautiful clear design, absolutly timeless.
But I guess Lady Walker has worn a tiara with the small diamond between the aquamarines. A first I thought that they were placed below the stones, too. But by zooming it as far as possible and compare it with the picture of the Alexandra tiara at Albion Art I saw that the stones at the foto by their colour and clearness getting transparence. They seems to be the interspace between while the the diamond frames seems to be the stones. You can see the small bows with a diamond dot are right above the dark section - the aquamarines.
So I think it is the original tiara Lady Walker wore.
On the Royal Magazin site Ursula has an excellent photo of an aquamarine and diamond necklace which is almost a mirror image of the aquamarine tiara which it is said originally belonged to Empress Alexandra.
Royal Magazine site https://royal-magazin.de/russia/alexandra-romanov-aquamarine.htm
Ursula notes that the necklace and the earrings were made by Hennells circa 1980, and were offered for sale (auctioned?) by Sotheby's in St Moritz in 1982.
From the information in Ursula's site the major differences are --
1. The tiara said to be have belonged to Empress Alexandra had a narrow band of diamonds along the top of the tiara, emphasising the kokoshnik shape. In the band section, this tiara has small diamonds in between the aquamarines.
Tiara said to be Empress Alexandra's.
2. The second jewel, which Ursula states was made as a necklace, does not have a band of small diamonds framing the small arch motifs below/above the aquamarines. Secondly, in what would be the band section (if worn as a tiara) the small diamonds are placed in the centre under each aquamarine.
The image below was taken from Royal Magazin https://royal-magazin.de/russia/alexandra-romanov-aquamarine.htm
Section of the necklace said to made by Hennells circa 1980. Image has been rotated to show how the jewel would look as a tiara.
I have a photo of Lady Mary Stuart Walker wearing what looks like the second jewel as a tiara, the only difference being that it has a narrow band of diamonds emphasising the kokoshnik shape.
This jewel has small diamonds in the band below the aquamarines
1938
Closer view
The earrings worn by Lady Mary look as if they might match those shown in Ursula's site, but because the image I found is fuzzy, it is impossible to be certain.
Lady Mary Stuart Walker was the daughter of the Marquess and Marchioness of Bute, her mother, Eileen, being the daughter of the Earl and Countess of Granard, the latter being the American heiress, Beatrice Mills, one time owner of the Cartier kokoshnik which Princess Marie Louise left to the Duke of Gloucester.
I didn't see anything in the press stating that Lady Mary Stuart Walker was wearing aquamarines at the 1938 function; however, it is certain that she owned aquamarines as her parents gave her an aquamarine necklace, earrings and bracelet as a wedding gift. Sadly there were no photos or sketches of her wedding gifts in the press.
In the photo above Lady Mary is wearing a necklace, but whether it or the tiara was the necklace she received as a wedding gift is unknown to me.
If Lady Mary Stuart Walker was photographed wearing the jewels offered for sale by Sotheby's in 1982 then they could not have been made by Hennells circa 1980. They might have been made by Hennells but not circa 1980.
The other possibility is that there is a third jewel closely resembling the tiara said to have belonged to Empress Alexandra.
Has anyone come across any additional information which might help to solve this puzzle? Ursula did not give any indication of provenance for the necklace and earrings which Sotheby's offered for sale in St Moritz in 1982.
385
Responses
« Back to index | View thread »