It does go on to quote Lady a Curzon “tonight after the past had gone we hold a drawing room. I wear my new tiara, an imitation collar of pearls I bought in Paris, my diamond necklace and the four rows of pearls” letter is undated but must refer to her time as Vicereine as it mentions a drawing room. It also states that it gave her great pleasure to see the comments about her fake sapphire necklace. The source for this comment is a letter to her mother dated 31 May 1901 that is not quoted or reproduced. I think it worth mentioning that one of the articles mentions a diamond necklace and Yet the ruby ornament seems a bit vague. One of the articles says “I am told” meaning second hand. And if it’s true that Lady Curzon was laughing at the press, these could be what she found funny. They reported several times that her dress included real emeralds. The comment about a parure cannot be true as it had disappeared at her death. Even if it means demi parure that means a complete set was given at a single time not several separate items. It would a least be a necklace, a brooch and a pair of earrings. The article seems to be suggesting an impressive suite that is unlikely to be an ornament, a clasp and a ring. I think each comment needs to be read separately to each other since the press were so unreliable. She clearly had enough ruby jewellery to wear together to create an effect but it seems to have been with other items and perhaps these other items were what caused the effect of impressiveness.
215
Responses
« Back to index | View thread »