Posters of original research, analyses, insights etc retain all rights to their work. Such research etc cannot be used in any format without the written consent of the author.

Empress Marie Feodorovna Jewels Posted by MarcA on February 27, 2019, 11:58 am Based on the previous thread and Beth's suggestion I thought we could have a look through the jewels of the dowager Empress. I've put in a link to the enormous diamond necklace she had but I'm hoping that others can insert direct photo's. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/40/Empress_Maria_Feodorovna.JPG If I remember correctly that she wore this necklace on a trip to London to see her sister Alexandra when she was still Princess of Wales and stunned London society with it. If I also remember correctly the dowager Empress always had precedence over the current Empress at court and therefore kept the best jewels so until her death in Marie's case they never got handed over to the last empress.

Empress Marie Feodorovna Sapphires Posted by 992234177 on February 27, 2019, 12:48 pm, in reply to "Empress Marie Feodorovna Jewels" I would like to post her sapphires. I’m not sure if it’s two sets as there are some overlaps. Couple of years ago a photo of some jewels surfaced, including a tiara with sapphires and diamonds en tremblant. I think this tiara matched a necklace in Fersman, and possibly a sapphire bracelet also in the discovered cache of photographs. The tiara was also worn attached to a kokoshnik headdress with the necklace that was hastily made for her to wear to a costume ball (Fersman) Tiara https://pin.it/36lwr45fsd7bbc Necklace https://ibb.co/vB58jhL Hastily made collar https://pin.it/ijwsfx3e3oaafn In tiara off it’s frame and collar https://pin.it/dhrdhbpp6qj6db Tiara, Necklace and Bracelet https://ibb.co/K2gX2sn My guess is there must be a brooch to match the set as that is how Russian parures seem to work (tiara, necklace, brooch). Not sure of the huge sapphire cluster brooches seen in the group shot are part of the parure, I would say not. Just to clarify that I’m not talking about the set made for Alexandra Feodorovna , the brooch of which might still exist if the photo I posted on the other board is correct, though the loop design is quite similar in each. Perhaps they were both inspired by the sea. Post about brooch http://members2.boardhost.com/royal-jewels/msg/1523210323.html

Re: Empress Marie Feodorovna Sapphires Posted by Dave on March 1, 2019, 12:54 pm, in reply to "Empress Marie Feodorovna Sapphires" I have a niggling feeling that QM and possibly her mother in law QA may have purchased a few more Romanov jewels we know nothing about or where they say the whereabouts are not known. It's only a matter of time and I gather we will see lots more new pieces coming from the vaults as in the case of the Greville bequest. The only one I can evision wearing jewels like the Romanovs is Camilla the DoCorn for the moment. Regards, Dave. Previous Message I would like to post her sapphires. I’m not sure if it’s two sets as there are some overlaps. Couple of years ago a photo of some jewels surfaced, including a tiara with sapphires and diamonds en tremblant. I think this tiara matched a necklace in Fersman, and possibly a sapphire bracelet also in the discovered cache of photographs. The tiara was also worn attached to a kokoshnik headdress with the necklace that was hastily made for her to wear to a costume ball (Fersman) Tiara https://pin.it/36lwr45fsd7bbc Necklace https://ibb.co/vB58jhL Hastily made collar https://pin.it/ijwsfx3e3oaafn In tiara off it’s frame and collar https://pin.it/dhrdhbpp6qj6db Tiara, Necklace and Bracelet https://ibb.co/K2gX2sn My guess is there must be a brooch to match the set as that is how Russian parures seem to work (tiara, necklace, brooch). Not sure of the huge sapphire cluster brooches seen in the group shot are part of the parure, I would say not. Just to clarify that I’m not talking about the set made for Alexandra Feodorovna , the brooch of which might still exist if the photo I posted on the other board is correct, though the loop design is quite similar in each. Perhaps they were both inspired by the sea. Post about brooch http://members2.boardhost.com/royal-jewels/msg/1523210323.html

Empress Marie Feodorovna Wave Parure Posted by 992234177 on February 27, 2019, 1:12 pm, in reply to "Empress Marie Feodorovna Jewels" Wave Parure of pearls and diamonds consisting of Tiara, Nevklace and brooch. It is possible that the brooch is earlier than most of the set as she is pictured in it when quite young. Perhaps the brooch inspired the suite. It is also possible that the Tiara and Nevklace are not connected to the Brooch. Tiara and Necklace https://pin.it/s5bl6c4ebcdrjo Tiara with Brooch on right https://pin.it/7nt7c6pmbnfybn Grand Duchess Xenia wearing the necklace elements in her Kokoshnik https://ibb.co/qCtLHzW EMF in Necklace, Brooch https://pin.it/7u54ubs5yc3d2e EMF in Tiara https://pin.it/b2jpydbdxlycqo EMF in brooch when young https://pin.it/k7otzxnh4fxs2l

Re: Empress Marie Feodorovna Wave Parure Posted by MarcA on February 27, 2019, 3:55 pm, in reply to "Empress Marie Feodorovna Wave Parure" That is a very impressive parure. The brooch is a bit out of synch with the rest of it and maybe only being worn as it's a diamond pearl brooch that goes with it. The brooch could also be an older piece and was considered too personal or connected with the family to change it. Was there anything the EMF had or had access to in emeralds, rubies or any other coloured stones? I knew about the sapphires an incredibly impressive parure. Previous Message Wave Parure of pearls and diamonds consisting of Tiara, Nevklace and brooch. It is possible that the brooch is earlier than most of the set as she is pictured in it when quite young. Perhaps the brooch inspired the suite. It is also possible that the Tiara and Nevklace are not connected to the Brooch. Tiara and Necklace https://pin.it/s5bl6c4ebcdrjo Tiara with Brooch on right https://pin.it/7nt7c6pmbnfybn Grand Duchess Xenia wearing the necklace elements in her Kokoshnik https://ibb.co/qCtLHzW EMF in Necklace, Brooch https://pin.it/7u54ubs5yc3d2e EMF in Tiara https://pin.it/b2jpydbdxlycqo EMF in brooch when young https://pin.it/k7otzxnh4fxs2l

Re: Empress Marie Feodorovna Wave Parure Posted by 992234177 on February 27, 2019, 9:18 pm, in reply to "Re: Empress Marie Feodorovna Wave Parure" I don’t think rubies were very popular in the imperial family and other than brooches in Fersman I don’t know of any emeralds. Pearls seem to have been her thing.

OT. FYI Russian Prcdence Posted by 992234177 on February 27, 2019, 1:51 pm, in reply to "Empress Marie Feodorovna Jewels" I read that the reason an empresss dowager has precedence ove an empress consort was that in 1801 Tsar Alexander I (the one in War and Peace) was behind the murder of his father Tsar Paul I (son of Catherine the Great) and as his mother was a bit pissed about her spouse being slaughtered he gave he this as a sorry, not sorry sort of fauxpology. Also (please correct me if I’m wrong), the word tsar sometimes means king not emperor so they were actually “tsar et imperator” King and emperor. I think it was tsar of all the russians or Russias and emperor of Russia. The change may have been to westernise the title not to upgrade it as tsar comes from the Latin Caesar meaning emperor. And Tsarevich originally was usd by all male children prior to the grand duke/prince title being introduced and was replaced as the heir apparents title by Tsesarevich. His wife was the Tsesarevna. Daughters were called something like Tsarevna.

Re: OT. FYI Russian Prcdence Posted by MarcA on February 27, 2019, 4:40 pm, in reply to "OT. FYI Russian Prcdence " Tsar I know is a derivative of the name Caesar as is Kaiser. The 19th century was also a time when a few Imperial families got created with the title Emperor or Empress sitting above the still existent royal titles. Previous Message I read that the reason an empresss dowager has precedence ove an empress consort was that in 1801 Tsar Alexander I (the one in War and Peace) was behind the murder of his father Tsar Paul I (son of Catherine the Great) and as his mother was a bit pissed about her spouse being slaughtered he gave he this as a sorry, not sorry sort of fauxpology. Also (please correct me if I’m wrong), the word tsar sometimes means king not emperor so they were actually “tsar et imperator” King and emperor. I think it was tsar of all the russians or Russias and emperor of Russia. The change may have been to westernise the title not to upgrade it as tsar comes from the Latin Caesar meaning emperor. And Tsarevich originally was usd by all male children prior to the grand duke/prince title being introduced and was replaced as the heir apparents title by Tsesarevich. His wife was the Tsesarevna. Daughters were called something like Tsarevna.

Empress Marie Feodorovna Turquoise ? Posted by 992234177 on February 28, 2019, 9:42 am, in reply to "Empress Marie Feodorovna Jewels" This one is a bit iffy. According to Fersman they were made in approximately 1895. Fersman seems to be a bit off on dates generally. It was made by Fabergé who made a brooch from a suite of emeralds for EAF and with the date is usually assumed to have been made for her daughter in law as well but this has not been confirmed to my knowledge. If the date is correct or indeed earlier it could have been made for EMF. The tiara and brooch have been pictured from Fersman but the probable matching necklace never has. It was recreated by a another royal house in a smaller form but I cannot remember who or which house it was. Tiara and Brooch (colourised) https://pin.it/sw7kktg2bus3q6 On table from Fersman https://i.ibb.co/5YQt120/74-D0031-A-BB7-A-42-E2-B860-C3920-C4-C02-D5.png

Re: Empress Marie Feodorovna Turquoise ? Posted by Beth on February 28, 2019, 12:09 pm, in reply to "Empress Marie Feodorovna Turquoise ?" What an interesting thread this is! The "copy" was photographed on Princess Christopher of Greece, but how and when she acquired this set is unknown to me. Re the Russian items. This 2012 paper on the Faberge research site indicates that the whereabouts of the tiara and brooch are unknown. https://fabergeresearch.com/newsletter-2012-spring-2/ That has made me wonder if the Greek tiara was in fact the original (modified by removing the base) which was purchased by the Count of Paris for his daughter, Francoise, when she married. An easy to follow site on Fersman's catalogue is at https://www.romanovempire.org/topics/academician+fersman For the turquoise set see https://www.romanovempire.org/media/illustrations-of-the-catalog-the-diamond-fund-of-the-ussr-p-81-737956 Queen Sophie of Greece was given an elaborate and expensive set of turquoises when she married, but others have always argued that they are not the jewels worn by Princess Christopher. That parure is a great mystery as, although it was reported in the press and the Empress Frederick commented on it in letters, no photos of it have surfaced.

Re: Greek Turquoise Parure Posted by The Royal Watcher on February 28, 2019, 4:24 pm, in reply to "Re: Empress Marie Feodorovna Turquoise ?" I featured the replica Greek Turquoise Parure in a recent article, HERE, and in my research, I found that the Parure was commissioned by Queen Olga of Greece, from Fabergé, and then inherited by her youngest son, Prince Christopher, who got a less precious stone being a younger son according to Prince Michael. Queen Olga’s Fabergé Turquoise Parure was sold sometime during or soon after WWII, when Princess Françoise was in exile in Morocco and Spain, and its current whereabouts are unknown.

Re: Greek Turquoise Parure Posted by Beth on March 1, 2019, 8:11 am, in reply to "Re: Greek Turquoise Parure" I know that it is popularly accepted that the Greek turquoise parure, as worn by Princess Christopher, was commissioned by Queen Olga from Faberge, but I have never seen anything by an historian to support this. Perhaps I haven't been looking in the correct places! My queries arise from the following. 1. The upper section of the Russian and Greek tiara appear identical. The only differences appear to be that the Greek tiara lacks the base/bandeau section. What are the chances that Faberge would risk Imperial patronage by making an identical item for another, but less powerful, royal family? 2. We have no public record of the Greek parure until after the 1929 wedding of Princess Francoise. Unfortunately, I do not read even one word of Greek so, even if the newspapers were available, I could not check to see if there was even any mention of Queen Olga wearing turquoises and how they might have been arranged. I haven't read Prince Michael's book. Did he specifically say that the parure was from Queen Olga? Or just that his father inherited turquoises? I think we need to keep an open mind on this until someone has had the opportunity to look at primary source documents which might help unravel the mystery. Previous Message I featured the replica Greek Turquoise Parure in a recent article, HERE , and in my research, I found that the Parure was commissioned by Queen Olga of Greece, from Fabergé, and then inherited by her youngest son, Prince Christopher, who got a less precious stone being a younger son according to Prince Michael. Queen Olga’s Fabergé Turquoise Parure was sold sometime during or soon after WWII, when Princess Françoise was in exile in Morocco and Spain, and its current whereabouts are unknown.

Re: Greek Turquoise Parure Posted by MarcA on March 1, 2019, 12:59 pm, in reply to "Re: Greek Turquoise Parure" One thing I’m not very clear of, and this could open up a lot thoughts, is the catalogue that the Bolshevik government had drawn we discussed a few months, did it actually move forward to a sale of them? I suspect a lot got broken up and the stones sold individually to avert the legacy of things like the Vladimir emeralds. Mind you we know a few pieces are around with a pearl and diamond Kokoshnik seen amongst Imelda Marco’s contentious collection. Previous Message I know that it is popularly accepted that the Greek turquoise parure, as worn by Princess Christopher, was commissioned by Queen Olga from Faberge, but I have never seen anything by an historian to support this. Perhaps I haven't been looking in the correct places! My queries arise from the following. 1. The upper section of the Russian and Greek tiara appear identical. The only differences appear to be that the Greek tiara lacks the base/bandeau section. What are the chances that Faberge would risk Imperial patronage by making an identical item for another, but less powerful, royal family? 2. We have no public record of the Greek parure until after the 1929 wedding of Princess Francoise. Unfortunately, I do not read even one word of Greek so, even if the newspapers were available, I could not check to see if there was even any mention of Queen Olga wearing turquoises and how they might have been arranged. I haven't read Prince Michael's book. Did he specifically say that the parure was from Queen Olga? Or just that his father inherited turquoises? I think we need to keep an open mind on this until someone has had the opportunity to look at primary source documents which might help unravel the mystery. Previous Message I featured the replica Greek Turquoise Parure in a recent article, HERE , and in my research, I found that the Parure was commissioned by Queen Olga of Greece, from Fabergé, and then inherited by her youngest son, Prince Christopher, who got a less precious stone being a younger son according to Prince Michael. Queen Olga’s Fabergé Turquoise Parure was sold sometime during or soon after WWII, when Princess Françoise was in exile in Morocco and Spain, and its current whereabouts are unknown.

What was sold Posted by Beth on March 2, 2019, 5:35 am, in reply to "Re: Greek Turquoise Parure" I doubt if historians are even yet aware of precisely what was sold by the Bolsheviks, although there are bound to be documents in the Russian archives. It is said by many authors that a large number of items (for example necklaces with large diamonds) were broken up and the stones sold individually. The government appears to have sold items to individual dealers privately. In turn these dealers auctioned items or again sold them privately. From time to time items turn up which are said to have a Romanov provenance. Some of these, of course, belonged to members of the wider family. One syndicate which purchased significant items from the Soviets sold their collection through Christie's in London in 1927. Some items from this sale are well known; others have disappeared without a trace. After the auction one London paper published coloured photos. Another gave a description of the main items in the auction. Even Queen Mary was interested. As far as we know she did not purchase anything, although the elaborate snuff box was purchased -- circa 1930 (I think) after it had been sold several times. The elegant pearl drop tiara, which has ended up in the collection of Imelda Marcos, was sold at this auction to a dealer who was probably acting for Gladys (Deacon), Duchess of Marlborough, the subsequent owner.

Re: What was sold (II) Posted by Beth on March 2, 2019, 8:53 am, in reply to "What was sold" Vincent Meylan, Christie's. The jewellery archives revealed, pp. 238-247 has correlated the information on a number of the jewels which were sold in the 1927 sale against relatively recent Christie's auctions where a number of stunning jewels were re-sold. If anyone has time to look for links the jewels are 1. 4 diamond flower brooches, Christie's New York, 19 April 2004 2. A pearl and diamond spray brooch Christie's, Geneva, 1 May 1975 (this won't be on the net) 3. A pair of amethyst and diamond earrings, Christie's Geneva, 15 November 2007 4 A diamond bracelet, Christie's, Geneva, 17 May 2006 5 Brooch of a bird on a branch, mixed stones, Christie's Geneva, 15 November 2007. The elaborate snuff box auctioned in 1927 is now in the Royal Collection https://www.rct.uk/collection/9044/table-snuff-box having been purchased by Queen Mary in 1932. The elaborate ears of wheat tiara may have been purchased by a British person -- if the following is anything to go by. But, as far as I know, the jewel has "disappeared" from public records. The Nuptial crown is today in the Hillwood Museum, thanks to Marjorie Merriweather Post https://www.hillwoodmuseum.org/collection/item/17.63 That still leaves well over 100 items sold in 1927 unaccounted for!

Re: What was sold Posted by 992234177 on March 2, 2019, 10:16 am, in reply to "Re: What was sold (II)" It seems ridiculous to my eyes that you would buy the Wheat Ears Tiara and then break it up for the stones, even if you wanted the big stones, surely a responsible owner would alter it to cover up the loss, like the Westminster Tiara. I assume that at least some of the financial value at the time would have been historical significance. Even in an era of no interweb, surely it would have been a massive feat to own the item and not know what the item was, this is of course assuming that it has been broken up and knowing how long the (Marcos) Drop Pearl Tiara was M.I.A. for, it might not have been. I would so love to see the Russian Fringe Tiara with Pearls, such a beautiful variation on a classic. https://pin.it/nje2h44nm2bkh3 Also I have just noticed something. Some Russian tiaras almost seem as if they can be worn in two half’s. It might be the result of dealing with suspended diamonds that are en tremblant, but it is odd that they didn’t frame them as would be more conventional. Pink Diamond Kokoshnik https://pin.it/6ctm5ukntc4n2z Elizabeth Alexeievna Diamond Tiara https://pin.it/7crtipgb3ye3mx Grand Duchess Elena Kokoshnik (not so obvious) https://pin.it/eunr3o4qt2qt4y Even the Lichtenstein Kokoshnik has a bit of a divisible look https://pin.it/uy5px3k65e2s4n The Pearl Drop Tiara has a slight look of having been one half of one of these, except it’s too flat.

Re: What was sold Posted by MarcA on March 2, 2019, 2:10 pm, in reply to "Re: What was sold" I completely agree with you on breaking up pieces where a lot of the significant value lies in the provenance. What's the point of buying the tiara of an Empress and then saying my two bracelets are what it used to be. That is why a have a theory that the GDV sapphire tiara was possibly sold on by Cartier in a private sale and not broken up. If it was broken up then surely you'd at least with the sapphires be using the history as a selling point. As things get lost in time I wonder if there are any families now with pieces from the sales that just don't know the provenance. There are possibly as well in the vaults of the Kremlin or National Bank Romanov jewels. Previous Message It seems ridiculous to my eyes that you would buy the Wheat Ears Tiara and then break it up for the stones, even if you wanted the big stones, surely a responsible owner would alter it to cover up the loss, like the Westminster Tiara. I assume that at least some of the financial value at the time would have been historical significance. Even in an era of no interweb, surely it would have been a massive feat to own the item and not know what the item was, this is of course assuming that it has been broken up and knowing how long the (Marcos) Drop Pearl Tiara was M.I.A. for, it might not have been. I would so love to see the Russian Fringe Tiara with Pearls, such a beautiful variation on a classic. https://pin.it/nje2h44nm2bkh3 Also I have just noticed something. Some Russian tiaras almost seem as if they can be worn in two half’s. It might be the result of dealing with suspended diamonds that are en tremblant, but it is odd that they didn’t frame them as would be more conventional. Pink Diamond Kokoshnik https://pin.it/6ctm5ukntc4n2z Elizabeth Alexeievna Diamond Tiara https://pin.it/7crtipgb3ye3mx Grand Duchess Elena Kokoshnik (not so obvious) https://pin.it/eunr3o4qt2qt4y Even the Lichtenstein Kokoshnik has a bit of a divisible look https://pin.it/uy5px3k65e2s4n The Pearl Drop Tiara has a slight look of having been one half of one of these, except it’s too flat.

Turquoise’s Posted by Vincent on March 3, 2019, 3:13 pm, in reply to "Re: Empress Marie Feodorovna Turquoise ?" This is a very interesting theory Beth. One detail though, princesse Francoise ´ s father was the duc de Guise. He actually gave a lot of jewels to his daughters. The younger one Anne, duchesse d’Aoste received one of the tiaras from the famous Lobanoff de rostoff collection, so it would make sense that princesse Francoise also received some jewels. After all, the Orleans family was still super rich in the 1920/30. And a princess had to be given a tiara in her corbeille de noces. Prince Michel of Greece gives more details in his books about the fact that the set was dismantled on his mother’s request in the 1940s and the stones sold, than he does about the origin of the set. Actually, if the jewels had been from queen Olga ‘s estate, it would have been strange for princesse Francoise to sell the stones. After the death of her husband, Prince Christophe of Greece, they would have been the property of her son, and not hers. But it was the war and at some point they must have been really short of money. Prince Michel has said many time that he found two turquoise’s after his mother’s death, which had not been sold. He had a golden bangle made with them. He also mentioned many time ( I mean during conversations) the urge his mother and uncle and aunt felt to sell everything during and after the war. As if they wanted to get rid of the past.

Re: Turquoise’s Posted by Beth on March 3, 2019, 5:47 pm, in reply to "Turquoise’s " What a boo-boo I made! Thank you Vincent. I wonder if anything might have been said in the French press at the time of the Princess' wedding? Previous Message This is a very interesting theory Beth. One detail though, princesse Francoise ´ s father was the duc de Guise. He actually gave a lot of jewels to his daughter. The younger one Anne, duchesse d’Aistd, received one of the tiaras from the famous lobanoff de rostoff collection, so it would make sense that princesse Francoise also received some jewels. After all, the Orleanx family was still super rich in the 1920/30. And a princess had to be given a tiara in her corbeille de noces. Prince Michel of Greece gives mord details in his books about the fact that the set was dismantled on his mother’s request in the 1940s and the stones sold, than he died about the acquisition of the set. Actually, if the jewels had been from queen logs ‘s estate, it would have been strange for princesse Francoise to sell the stones, as basically they were the property of her son, and not hers, after Prince Christophe’ s death. Prince Michel has said many time that he found two turquoise’s after his mother’s death, which had not been sold. He had a golden bangle made with them.

Re: Turquoise’s Posted by Vincent on March 4, 2019, 2:57 am, in reply to "Re: Turquoise’s " Not a lot I guess, at the time, the french royal family was still living in exile. I remember, princesse Francoise was given a diamond bracelet created by Mellerio by the french monarchists. I found this in the Mellerio archives.

Re: Turquoise’s Posted by Beth on March 4, 2019, 7:17 am, in reply to "Re: Turquoise’s " Thank you Vincent! When I think logically about it all, I suspect that the Italian media might be worth while exploring as the wedding took place in Palermo, but whether the Italian press would have been interested is another question, although no doubt the press would have reported on the discussions surrounding Prince Christopher's conversion to the Roman Catholic church. Perhaps the family didn't release any information. Previous Message Not a lot I guess, at the time, the french royal family was still living in exile. I remember, princesse Francoise was given a diamond bracelet created by Mellerio by the french monarchists. I found this in the Mellerio archives.

Re: Turquoise’s Posted by The Royal Watcher on March 4, 2019, 12:21 pm, in reply to "Turquoise’s " Thank you for your information Vincent, I have updated my article! It is nice to know that at least some piece remains with Prince Michael!

« Back to index