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.

UK jewells - missing in action Posted by Mike on March 24, 2019, 12:01 pm As I mentioned in my previous post there are many pieces missing in action in the UK collection. I think that part of this is due to having a monarch who is not really excited by jewellery (not a criticism of Her Majesty just an observation. Pieces I can immediately think of include:- * 2 sapphires tiaras. * Sautoirs of pearls, diamonds, sapphires belonging to Queen Mary and the Queen Mum. * Sapphire suite given to Queen Mum for her wedding. * Indian emerald jewellery * Turquoise parure last seen on Princess Margaret * various stomachers of diamonds, pearls and emerald (* part of diamond stomacher worn at golden jubilee lunch). I also suspect that some Greville pieces have not been worn. I will do some more research and add to list as soon as I can. Mike

Re: UK jewells - missing in action Posted by Dave on March 24, 2019, 1:57 pm, in reply to "UK jewells - missing in action" I believe when one is born into or around certain aspects of wealth they are bound to find the things they were always aware of as just normal while one who is totally from another aspect of life wold find the lifestyles of say royalty as just fascinating and unreal and I feel this is where HM's relationship with jewellery comes into being. She has always seen and known about it so it has less of an impact on her, and hers is at the top of the stack so it comes as normal to her, no need for her to flaunt it if she knows she has so much of the best already. Regards, Dave. Previous Message As I mentioned in my previous post there are many pieces missing in action in the UK collection. I think that part of this is due to having a monarch who is not really excited by jewellery (not a criticism of Her Majesty just an observation. Pieces I can immediately think of include:- * 2 sapphires tiaras. * Sautoirs of pearls, diamonds, sapphires belonging to Queen Mary and the Queen Mum. * Sapphire suite given to Queen Mum for her wedding. * Indian emerald jewellery * Turquoise parure last seen on Princess Margaret * various stomachers of diamonds, pearls and emerald (* part of diamond stomacher worn at golden jubilee lunch). I also suspect that some Greville pieces have not been worn. I will do some more research and add to list as soon as I can. Mike

Re: UK jewells - missing in action Posted by Beth on March 25, 2019, 6:19 am, in reply to "Re: UK jewells - missing in action" It is a fascinating topic Mike. QEII has a very distinct public image and so we tend to see familiar tiaras, necklaces etc time and time again. But we don't know what HM wears in private. In The Queen's Diamonds there is a modern photo of Queen Mary's magnificent diamond sautoir which proves that the jewel is still intact. Perhaps HM wears it privately. It is versatile and, as was noted recently by 992234177, it would work well with HM's South African diamonds. I strongly suspect that the very elaborate emerald stomacher created by Queen Mary still exists as QEII wears parts of it as separate brooches. Hugh Roberts stated that the Teck crescents and roses tiara has been lent to the Duchess of Cornwall; yet, we have never seen photos of her wearing it. As Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother was not known to frequently dismantle and rework jewels, I suspect that her pearl and diamond sautoirs and her sapphire sautoir still exist and will re-emerge when fashions change. (I suspect that the sapphire suite given to QEQM for her wedding by Queen Mary was transformed into the elaborate sapphire sautoir worn by QEQM during the 1930s) .

Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list - Edited and modified Posted by Franck on March 26, 2019, 4:00 am, in reply to "Re: UK jewells - missing in action" What a fascinating topic ! thank you all about this subject ! I now do think that most of the jewels known by us have been found (worn, said to be dismantled, lost, sold or in the vault). My own list would be : 1. Queen Alexandra : - The huge diamond necklace worn for her coronation (one of the biggest mystery) - pendant are worn as earrings by Queen Sonja ; - The resille necklace worn by QM - must be in the vault described in QD - It is not written that it has been dismantled - The Garland Collier Resille - never seen a photo of QA wearing this necklace - must be disposed of - 2. Queen Mary : The Laurel wreath tiara (said to be a gift from the king of Italy - worn by Princess Mary, the Princess Royal - currently whereabouts unknown ; The Laurel wreath tiara/necklace wedding gift from the Duke of Westminster - worn once - must be dismantled The lozenge tiara worn by Princess Margaret after the death of QM in 1965 - must be in the vault A diamond fringe necklace worn once with the laureal wreath tiara/necklace - must be dismantled The pearl and diamond stomacher must be in the vault described in QD and it is not written that it has been dismantled The emerald and diamond stomacher must be in the vault described in QD and it is not written that it has been dismantled (photo of the stomacher) - only brooches worn by QEII The diamond collet necklace given as a wedding gift - currently whereabouts unknown The sapphire and diamond choker (photo from Beth) - currently whereabouts unknown I do not think the sautoir have been inherited - used to do the magnificent diamond sautoir (photo in the QD) 3. Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother : A pearl and diamond sautoir (wedding gift from her mother) A pearl and diamond sautoir (wedding gift from the City of London) - must be in the vault described in QD and it is not written that it has been dismantled A sapphire and diamond sautoir - must be in the vault described in QD and not said to be dismantled The turquoise and diamond parure - last worn by Princess Margaret 4. QEII The 2 unknown sapphire tiaras Contrary to what many think, most of the jewels (know by us) have now reappeared. The list is very small.... (please find my apologize I had made a mistake - jewels are not said to be dismantled (ex : the stomacher) - they must be in the vault) What do you think ? Can you add jewels to this list ? I have not listed small jewels such as brooches or pearl necklaces...it would be so difficult Franck Previous Message It is a fascinating topic Mike. QEII has a very distinct public image and so we tend to see familiar tiaras, necklaces etc time and time again. But we don't know what HM wears in private. In The Queen's Diamonds there is a modern photo of Queen Mary's magnificent diamond sautoir which proves that the jewel is still intact. Perhaps HM wears it privately. It is versatile and, as was noted recently by 992234177, it would work well with HM's South African diamonds. I strongly suspect that the very elaborate emerald stomacher created by Queen Mary still exists as QEII wears parts of it as separate brooches. Hugh Roberts stated that the Teck crescents and roses tiara has been lent to the Duchess of Cornwall; yet, we have never seen photos of her wearing it. As Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother was not known to frequently dismantle and rework jewels, I suspect that her pearl and diamond sautoirs and her sapphire sautoir still exist and will re-emerge when fashions change. (I suspect that the sapphire suite given to QEQM for her wedding by Queen Mary was transformed into the elaborate sapphire sautoir worn by QEQM during the 1930s) .

Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list Posted by Beth on March 26, 2019, 7:21 am, in reply to "Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list " Interesting! But who says that some of the jewels have been dismantled? For example -- the diamond and pearl stomacher worn by Queen Mary which her mother, Princess Mary Adelaide, inherited from the Duchess of Gloucester. I very much doubt if Queen Mary would have dismantled it as she wore it so often and it was an historic jewel.

Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list Posted by 992234177 on March 26, 2019, 9:39 am, in reply to "Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list " Id be interested in these items Queen Mary Sapphire Sunburst Bandeau Tiara Greville Meander Tiara with aigrette Queen Alexandra Garland Collier Résille Queen Mary Glasgow 51 Pearl £1000 14 inch PearlNecklace with Diamond Clasp Queen Mary Kent Pearl Necklace Queen Mary “Thousand Subject” pearl necklace with diamond clasp Queen Mary 3 Row Counties of England £6000 Pearl Necklace with Diamond Clasp Queen Mary George V 5 Row Pearl Necklace (I’m sure the pearl necklaces do exist but it would be interesting to see the difference between one row worth £1000 and three rows worth £6000) Queen Mary Sea Creature Brooch Queen Mary feather brooch form Empress Eugénie Queen Mary Rothschild large black pearls Brooch

Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list Some pearl information Posted by Beth on March 27, 2019, 8:49 am, in reply to "Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list " Identifying the various pearls is fraught with difficulties because, as far as I know, the media published images of only 2 of them at the time of the wedding in 1893: the pearls given to Queen Mary by George V and the Glasgow pearls. Secondly, it is highly likely that the pearls were restrung into different configurations from time to time depending on the whims of fashion. Sketch from a contemporary paper showing the George V pearls HM is said to have worn these to the Devonshire House Ball in 1897. An image of the Glasgow pearls was also published. The necklace had 51 graduated pearls in a single strand with a diamond cluster clasp and cost 950 pounds. The only set of images I am aware of where the clasp of Queen Mary's necklace is visible is the following. But I find it impossible to gauge whether she might be wearing the Glasgow pearls, the Kent pearls (of 47 large pearls with a diamond clasp) or any other strand. I cannot find any information about the number of pearls in the Combined Counties pearls or their size. All that was said was that the necklace had 3 strands and cost 5, 500 pounds. Yet, contemporary journalists who visited the display of gifts at the Imperial Institute were impressed by the beauty of the pearls --so I would assume that they had a very high lustre and very few imperfections. Re money collected and cost

Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list Some pearl information II Posted by Beth on March 27, 2019, 9:36 am, in reply to "Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list Some pearl information" I suspect that one of Queen Mary's wedding gifts, the pearl and diamond necklace described as the gift of the Thakore of Gondal (some reports say the Ranee), was the pearl choker with diamond motifs which is today worn by the Duchess of Gloucester -- but I cannot prove that. Various descriptions of the gift Queen Mary wore the choker frequently and eventually gave it to Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester. Today it is worn by the Duchess of Gloucester.

Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list Rothschild gift to Queen Mary Posted by Beth on March 27, 2019, 9:46 am, in reply to "Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list Some pearl information II" A year ago I posted on the RJWMB about the Rothschild gift to Queen Mary. I think it was given by Queen Mary to Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester, as part of her wedding gifts. http://members2.boardhost.com/royal-jewels/thread/1521432209.html

Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list Rothschild gift to Queen Mary Posted by 992234177 on March 27, 2019, 11:15 am, in reply to "Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list Rothschild gift to Queen Mary" Thank you for the information especially on the pearl necklaces. Sometimes when I look at my list of QEII’s collection I do wonder if you need that many pearl necklaces or 180 brooches especially when there tends to be so many items that look virtually indistinguishable from each other. No wonder we haven’t seen it all. I do wonder about the items that QV was given by India, including the description of Disraeli being shown carpet bags brimming full of jewels. I’d like to think that ropes of rubies overflowed but it’s more likely he meant that there were many Morocco leather jewels boxes in bags, being on this site does teach us to try and interpret words and not just go for what we want it to mean.

Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list Some pearl information. Glasgow pearls Posted by Beth on March 28, 2019, 6:11 am, in reply to "Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list Some pearl information" These photos were supplied by Franck, who is unable to post photos at present. I will let Franck explain why he thinks these are the Glasgow pearls; if I attempt to do so I am bound to make a mistake! Thank you for the wonderful photos Franck!

Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list Some pearl information. Glasgow pearls Posted by Franck on March 28, 2019, 7:11 am, in reply to "Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list Some pearl information. Glasgow pearls" I thank you Beth for the photos ! I do think that the clasps of the necklaces are the same (I had this impression before). What do you think ? Best regards, Franck Previous Message These photos were supplied by Franck, who is unable to post photos at present. I will let Franck explain why he thinks these are the Glasgow pearls; if I attempt to do so I am bound to make a mistake! Thank you for the wonderful photos Franck!

Queen Elizabeth II — Four-row pearl necklace Posted by Thomas on March 28, 2019, 7:31 am, in reply to "Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list Some pearl information. Glasgow pearls" A few more photos showing the four-rows necklace: Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip in Copenhagen 1957: the gap between the two last strands is bigger: by Sir Cecil Beaton, The Queen with Prince Andrew, 1960: by Brian Aris, 1996

Portraits by Donald McKague, 1959 Posted by Thomas on March 28, 2019, 7:26 am, in reply to "Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list Some pearl information. Glasgow pearls" Dear Beth, the first photos sent by Franck were taken by the Canadian photographer Donald McKague at Buckingham Palace in December 1958, and published in April 1959. In 1959 the Queen underwent an extensive "Royal tour" of every Canadian province, and the portraits were likely ordered on that occasion. I have collected a number of these photographs, which include some really touching double-portraits. It appears that the Queen and the Duke were shot in different outfits (day-wear and formal-wear), both in B&W and in colour. With her day dress the Queen wore these four strands of beautiful pearls, as she often did in earlier years. This picture highlights the size of the pearls and the shape of the clasps, unfortunately it is too dark to see them clearly: For our pleasure I have added some of the formal portraits:

Re: Portraits by Donald McKague, 1959 Posted by Dave on March 28, 2019, 2:01 pm, in reply to "Portraits by Donald McKague, 1959" Thanks again Thomas. Can anyone say whether the ring worn by HM on her left ring finger is her engagement ring? It some how appears different in size and shape to her more oval wedding ring. What does others say. Regards, Dave. Previous Message Dear Beth, the first photos sent by Franck were taken by the Canadian photographer Donald McKague at Buckingham Palace in December 1958, and published in April 1959. In 1959 the Queen underwent an extensive "Royal tour" of every Canadian province, and the portraits were likely ordered on that occasion. I have collected a number of these photographs, which include some really touching double-portraits. It appears that the Queen and the Duke were shot in different outfits (day-wear and formal-wear), both in B&W and in colour. With her day dress the Queen wore these four strands of beautiful pearls, as she often did in earlier years. This picture highlights the size of the pearls and the shape of the clasps, unfortunately it is too dark to see them clearly: For our pleasure I have added some of the formal portraits:

Re: Portraits by Donald McKague, 1959 - The art deco aquamarine bracelet Posted by Franck on April 1, 2019, 5:41 am, in reply to "Portraits by Donald McKague, 1959" Dear Thomas, Thank you for your photos ! please note that QEII was wearing the art deco aquamarine bracelet ! Franck Previous Message Dear Beth, the first photos sent by Franck were taken by the Canadian photographer Donald McKague at Buckingham Palace in December 1958, and published in April 1959. In 1959 the Queen underwent an extensive "Royal tour" of every Canadian province, and the portraits were likely ordered on that occasion. I have collected a number of these photographs, which include some really touching double-portraits. It appears that the Queen and the Duke were shot in different outfits (day-wear and formal-wear), both in B&W and in colour. With her day dress the Queen wore these four strands of beautiful pearls, as she often did in earlier years. This picture highlights the size of the pearls and the shape of the clasps, unfortunately it is too dark to see them clearly: For our pleasure I have added some of the formal portraits:

Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list Some pearl information Posted by Thomas on March 28, 2019, 6:52 am, in reply to "Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list Some pearl information" Thank you all for your posts! The image of the five-row pearl necklace given by the Duke of York to his bride made me wonder if it could have been used to make the two necklaces given by George V to his two granddaughters at the time of his Silver Jubilee... What do you think? Previous Message Identifying the various pearls is fraught with difficulties because, as far as I know, the media published images of only 2 of them at the time of the wedding in 1893: the pearls given to Queen Mary by George V and the Glasgow pearls. Secondly, it is highly likely that the pearls were restrung into different configurations from time to time depending on the whims of fashion. Sketch from a contemporary paper showing the George V pearls HM is said to have worn these to the Devonshire House Ball in 1897. An image of the Glasgow pearls was also published. The necklace had 51 graduated pearls in a single strand with a diamond cluster clasp and cost 950 pounds. The only set of images I am aware of where the clasp of Queen Mary's necklace is visible is the following. But I find it impossible to gauge whether she might be wearing the Glasgow pearls, the Kent pearls (of 47 large pearls with a diamond clasp) or any other strand. I cannot find any information about the number of pearls in the Combined Counties pearls or their size. All that was said was that the necklace had 3 strands and cost 5, 500 pounds. Yet, contemporary journalists who visited the display of gifts at the Imperial Institute were impressed by the beauty of the pearls --so I would assume that they had a very high lustre and very few imperfections. Re money collected and cost

Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list Some pearl information Posted by Beth on March 28, 2019, 7:58 am, in reply to "Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list Some pearl information" An intriguing idea Thomas! Such a scenario would account for 5 rows of pearls. Each Princess would have been given part of an historic jewel on an historic occasion, something which would have appealed to Queen Mary's sense of continuity. I have never been convinced that the pearls Queen Mary wore to the Devonshire House Ball in 1897 were the ones given to her by George V for their wedding, as that set of pearls had larger pearls in the centre of each row; the ones in the press sketch and the only known photo of the pearls in a photo of the wedding gifts does not have larger pearls in the centre. Queen Mary dressed for Devonshire House Ball

Pearls. I am totally confused Posted by Beth on March 28, 2019, 8:05 am, in reply to "Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list Some pearl information" I have to confess that I am totally confused!! Hopefully, my brain will start working and sort out the various issues during the day.

Re: UK jewels - missing in action - my list Some pearl information Posted by Thomas on March 28, 2019, 8:23 am, in reply to "Re: UK jewells - missing in action - my list Some pearl information" That is indeed a wild guess, and it is hard to rely on such pictures. Yet like you I don't think these pearls were the same one as those worn at the Devonshire ball. The similarity between the two necklaces gifted by George V to his granddaughters has always intrigued me. It ould make sense that they came from an already matched set. Anyway the George V pearls have been worn by QE throughout her life, and I have no doubt this is a sentimental jewel to her. On a sidenote I don't think Pss Margaret's two rows of pearls ever resurfaced after her death. Both necklaces are seen (in colour) in this 1944 picture. Since the pearls gifted by the Duke of York look quite small, there is also a possibility that they were the ones gifted by Queen Mary to Princess Margaret on her 18th birthday (sold at Christie's) There have been so many pearls gravitating around the BRF that we could keep on making guesses tonight, if I didn't have to get some sleep! Previous Message An intriguing idea Thomas! Such a scenario would account for 5 rows of pearls. Each Princess would have been given part of an historic jewel on an historic occasion, something which would have appealed to Queen Mary's sense of continuity. I have never been convinced that the pearls Queen Mary wore to the Devonshire House Ball in 1897 were the ones given to her by George V for their wedding, as that set of pearls had larger pearls in the centre of each row; the ones in the press sketch and the only known photo of the pearls in a photo of the wedding gifts does not have larger pearls in the centre. Queen Mary dressed for Devonshire House Ball

Re: UK jewels - missing in action - my list Some pearl information Posted by Dave on March 28, 2019, 1:55 pm, in reply to "Re: UK jewels - missing in action - my list Some pearl information" This thread has tuned out to be fascinating intrigue and discussion. Thanks Thomas for these very clear pictures. Have anyone noticed the diamond ring worn on HM QEQM's left hand in the first picture? Could this be a Greville piece? Regards, Dave. Previous Message That is indeed a wild guess, and it is hard to rely on such pictures. Yet like you I don't think these pearls were the same one as those worn at the Devonshire ball. The similarity between the two necklaces gifted by George V to his granddaughters has always intrigued me. It ould make sense that they came from an already matched set. Anyway the George V pearls have been worn by QE throughout her life, and I have no doubt this is a sentimental jewel to her. On a sidenote I don't think Pss Margaret's two rows of pearls ever resurfaced after her death. Both necklaces are seen (in colour) in this 1944 picture. Since the pearls gifted by the Duke of York look quite small, there is also a possibility that they were the ones gifted by Queen Mary to Princess Margaret on her 18th birthday (sold at Christie's) There have been so many pearls gravitating around the BRF that we could keep on making guesses tonight, if I didn't have to get some sleep! Previous Message An intriguing idea Thomas! Such a scenario would account for 5 rows of pearls. Each Princess would have been given part of an historic jewel on an historic occasion, something which would have appealed to Queen Mary's sense of continuity. I have never been convinced that the pearls Queen Mary wore to the Devonshire House Ball in 1897 were the ones given to her by George V for their wedding, as that set of pearls had larger pearls in the centre of each row; the ones in the press sketch and the only known photo of the pearls in a photo of the wedding gifts does not have larger pearls in the centre. Queen Mary dressed for Devonshire House Ball

Glasgow pearls Posted by Beth on March 28, 2019, 4:25 pm, in reply to "Re: UK jewels - missing in action - my list Some pearl information" I found that I had a more complete description of the Glasgow pearls. It says that the necklace had a round clasp with nine diamonds with a diamond on either side. I don't think that matches what can be seen in the photo of QEII with the Diamond Diadem. And I think the necklace HM is wearing has more than 51 pearls. As for whether the other photos Franck and Thomas posted might include the Glasgow pearls, I cheerfully admit that I cannot tell. I am totally confused at present.

« Back to index