What a tour de force! Many, many thanks Mauriz!
I appreciate just how much research and analytic skills are involved in such a post.
As ever Mauriz's keen eye helps us to solve puzzles, and acquire new knowledge.
I agree that the necklace sold by Bonhams with the ruby clasp is more than probably the one worn by Irene, Baroness Ravensdale. (I agree with Mauriz that it is. I think that, unless others can prove the necklace is definitely one owned by Lady Cynthia Mosley that a mistake has occurred.) The egg shaped pearls are distinctive. Irene Curzon, Baroness Ravensdale's, heirs were her Mosley nephews and, as we have seen, some of Lady Ravensdale's other jewels were sold in the same time frame, so it is not unexpected that this necklace might have belonged to her, and not her sister, Cynthia.
I have never seen any reports of Lady Alexandra Curzon receiving family pearls when she married, but her long pearl necklace rivals that of her sister, Lady Cynthia Mosley. By the time Lady Alexandra married, her father, the Marquess of Curzon, had died and so any "supposed gift" from him was not mentioned, as she would have inherited her share of her mother's jewels as a result of his death.
Apart from the pearls worn on her wedding day, she also had a necklace very similar to that of her sister, Irene, Baroness Ravensdale.
Lady Alexandra Metcalfe and Lady Ravensdale photographed wearing similar pearls necklaces as they went to a Royal Garden party in 1928.
Because of Lady Cynthia Mosley's involvement in her husband's political campaigns, the disparity between her privileged background and her political campaigns often attracted criticism. One such involved her wearing of the famous pearls.
A report from
The Sphere in April 1926
From a twentieth first century perspective, I think the above report is hilarious.