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.
Marjorie Post
Posted by Andrew U on November 27, 2019, 5:01 pm
I always kick myself for having missed the exhibit of Marjorie Merriwheather Post's collection of jewellry at her fabulous Hillwood Estate.
here is a great video presentation as well as an article.
The question I so desperately want to know is: why weren't the items originally from the French Crown Jewels donated to the Louvre instead of the American Museum of Natural History and why didn't the Friends of the Louvre lobby to have these treasures. It sort of upsets me! Lol.
Posted by Sam (The Beau Monde) on November 28, 2019, 2:23 am, in reply to "Marjorie Post"
After what they did to Marie Louise's Emerald Tiara, the Louvre probably didn't want it back
Re: Marjorie Post
Posted by Beth on November 28, 2019, 6:47 am, in reply to "Re: Marjorie Post"
Thanks for the video Andrew U. Unfortunately, I have watched only the first few minutes so far. It looks to be very interesting.
Re where the "French" jewels should have gone.
To stimulate debate I am going to play Devil's Advocate and ask --
Weren't the jewels of Empress Marie Louise (acquired by Marjorie Post) private property, legitimately sold in the first instance? (I am not sure of the history of the diamonds in the earrings said to have belonged to Marie Antoinette)
If they were (and not looted like some items) then Marjorie Merriweather Post had every right to dispose of her property as she saw fit. She could have given the jewels to her daughters or friends.
Marjorie Merriweather Post was instrumental in establishing the jewellery section of the Smithonian, so her decision to give some to the museum was a patriotic as well as a philanthropic gesture.
Re: Marjorie Post
Posted by Laurent F on November 28, 2019, 8:29 pm, in reply to "Re: Marjorie Post"
The emerald parure was a private property of Empress Marie-Louise, a gift from Emperor Napoleon for their wedding.
Marie-Louise left the parure to her Habsbourg siblings, Grand-duke Leopold II of Tuscany and the by descent (Leopold II – Karl-Salvator – Marie-Therese (x Karl-Stefan duke of Teschen) – Karl-Albrecht (x Alice Ankarcrona) – Karl-Stefan who sold the parure). Alice Ankarcrona, wife of archduke Charles Albert, was the last one to wear it in it's full glory.
In 1953 the parure was sold and the tiara acquired by Van Cleef and Arpels who removed the emeralds, and had them replaced with turquoises, to create new jewels with stones of imperial origin !! The tiara with the turquoises was sold to Marjorie Post who left it later to the Smithsonian Institution. The necklace and the earrings were acquired some years ago by the Louvre Museum. The comb has been transformed but has disappeared.
Posted by Andrew U on November 30, 2019, 5:41 am, in reply to "Re: Marjorie Post"
Thank you for the history. So The Louvre was only able to get the necklace. Strange that Van Cleef chose to change out the stones in the Tiara but NOT the necklace.
I wonder at what point in time the Louvre decided to really amass a jewelry collection.
Beth, I hear your points. But I still rather the collection be united in France rather than dispersed. So many countries now aim to keep the historic artifacts from leaving the country. France just recently returned artifacts to Benin in Africa.
Previous Message
The emerald parure was a private property of Empress Marie-Louise, a gift from Emperor Napoleon for their wedding.
Marie-Louise left the parure to her Habsbourg siblings, Grand-duke Leopold II of Tuscany and the by descent (Leopold II – Karl-Salvator – Marie-Therese (x Karl-Stefan duke of Teschen) – Karl-Albrecht (x Alice Ankarcrona) – Karl-Stefan who sold the parure). Alice Ankarcrona, wife of archduke Charles Albert, was the last one to wear it in it's full glory.
In 1953 the parure was sold and the tiara acquired by Van Cleef and Arpels who removed the emeralds, and had them replaced with turquoises, to create new jewels with stones of imperial origin !! The tiara with the turquoises was sold to Marjorie Post who left it later to the Smithsonian Institution. The necklace and the earrings were acquired some years ago by the Louvre Museum. The comb has been transformed but has disappeared.
See my pages for more pictures
Re: Marjorie Post. Re Andrew U's points
Posted by Beth on November 30, 2019, 7:24 am, in reply to "Re: Marjorie Post"
Andrew U raised an interesting issue. In an ideal world it would be desirable if historic items could be displayed by museums in the country of origin. Alas, we have never managed to create such a world. It is only in very modern times that some nations and museums have made decisions to return some things in their collections; other museums take a different view.
Would I like to visit the Louvre and see all the available royal and imperial jewels in one place? Undoubtedly; yet there are also valid arguments for such items to remain in other museums when a private individual (who has legitimately purchased an item) has donated them to that museum. It is a complex situation.
At least today most museums provide information (and often imagery) online about their collections, so that people can access knowledge without having to spend time in a particular museum.
There are still many royal and imperial French jewels in private hands. Does the Louvre try to bid on all such items when the opportunity arises? I don't know. Whether the museum should is another question. Did the museum try to bid for the large ruby necklace from the crown diamond collection when it was auctioned by Christie's in 1993?
My comments above are only to stimulate debate and explore ideas.
Re: Marjorie Post. Thank you Laurent F!
Posted by Beth on November 30, 2019, 6:24 am, in reply to "Re: Marjorie Post"
Thank you Laurent F! I never knew the full connection details, nor had I ever seen a "modern" photo of the emerald parure being worn.
Do you know if the Empress Marie Louise's grand diamond necklace, now also in the Smithonian, was sold by the same family? Or does it have a different history?
Beth you totally got what I was trying to discuss. And, yes, thank you Laurant F for the information.
Why only the tiara got partially mangled?
Why only the necklace was sought after by the Louvre?
I do know that the Society of Friends of the Louvre are partially responsible for the acquisition of jewelry for the museum. They are the ones who bought many French pieces at auction. I remember hearing they also pressured the government not to let "patrimoine" items slip away. Here is there webpage with their recent acquisitions.
The diamond necklace was inherited by Archduchess Sophie then by her son Karl-Ludwig and at his death by his 3rd wife Maria-Teresa who sold it to Paul Louis Weiller, princess Sibylla of Luxembourg grand-father. He sold it to Harry Winston who sold it to Marjorie Post and she finally gave it to the Smithsonian
Thank you Laurent F! I never knew the full connection details, nor had I ever seen a "modern" photo of the emerald parure being worn.
Do you know if the Empress Marie Louise's grand diamond necklace, now also in the Smithonian, was sold by the same family? Or does it have a different history?
on November 27, 2019, 5:01 pm
Previous Message