Countess Of Wessex Jewellery

[Mermaid1962]

Perhaps Sophie's personal jewelry--such as her engagement ring, the necklace and earrings she wore on her wedding day, etc.--will go to James for his future wife's use.

[RubyPrincess168]

Soes anybody know anything about the brooch Sophie wore on her coat for Rememberance Sunday?

[Mermaid1962]

I haven't seen it close-up, but I assume that it's a brooch from one of her regiments.

[Warren]

From the London Daily Mail, 7 January 2012

New Jewellery for Sophie from the Royal Family of Bahrain

The Countess of Wessex received two "lavish" sets of jewels (believed to be suites) from the Royal Family of Bahrain four days before Christmas. She and the Earl of Wessex made a one day official stopover on behalf of the Queen following a visit to British troops in Afghanistan.

One set of jewels came from King Hamad, the other from the prime minister, Sheikh Khalifa bin Salman al Khalifa.
Sophie also received an "exquisite" silver and pearl cup from Crown Prince Salman.

Apart from confirming the existence of the jewels, Buckingham Palace would not reveal any details.
.

[Al_bina]

It would be fair to assume that the sets are of superior quality. Bahrain is known for its pearls.

[Baroness of Books]

And any suite of jewelery from Middle Eastern countries is sure to be impressive.

[Al_bina]

That is true. To give proper gifts is very important.

[Diarist]

Originally Posted by Molly2101

I was just wondering, does Sophie own her wedding tiara? Or is it just borrowed? If she owns it does it mean Louise will receive it? I am a bit jealous of Louise as she'll likely inherit Sophie's engagement ring which is to die for.

As to whether or not Sophie owns her wedding tiara, I don't think we can do more than speculate, based on what we do know already. As a general principle, the recent trend seems to be that any jewels from the Queen's personal [private] collection seem to be 'loaned out' to the female royal concerned. There seem to be two forms of loan - First, the 'temporary' loan: the most recent example was the Canadian Maple Leaf diamond brooch that Catherine wore in Canada on the recent royal tour. Everything I read in the quality papers stated that the brooch was loaned and not given. Even Diana, with a huge collection of her own, sometimes borrowed pieces temporarily from the Queen. Other loans seem to be much more long-term; again, using Princess Diana as an example, some of the pieces she was given were gifts from the Queen, but the unwritten subtext was that they were life-time loans. This would have prevented Diana selling them at any time of her life [pre-divorce or not]. I expect the reason for this was two fold: to prevent the disposition of pieces which the Queen herself regards not so much as her own personal property but which she herself 'holds in unwritten trust' for her family and also to avoid any liability for taxation ever arising. Whilst the Sovereign is exempt from all forms of taxation [at least thoretically, because the Queen's current decision to pay income tax is a voluntary one, not a legal one] her family are not, and if the Queen gives [outright] a gift of jewellery to anyone, the recipient would have to pay tax on the gift on receipt and the gift would then form part of the royal's estate on death, and therefore liable to inheritance tax. By never parting with so-called 'beneficial ownership' of pieces, the Queen in effect operates as a 'tax shelter'.

One has to say as well that with the recent divorce history of the BRF, if a piece is never 'gifted outright' to the particular royal, there is never any question of it being 'lost' to the BRF on any divorce of the recipient.

Incidentally, the recent gifts to Sophie that have just hit the papers this weekend will more properly be regarded as 'permanently loaned gifts to Sophie' with the understanding that they will revert to the Sovereign in due course in order to avoid tax liabilities. I am able to state this because a few years ago, Camilla was seen wearing a magnificent necklace which was a gift from one of Emirates and BP eventually clarified that it was in the nature of a permanant loan' rather than a [tax attracting] personal gift to the Duchess of Cornwall.

Finally to Sophie: her wedding tiara was, if I understand it, 'composed of other pieces' rather than being an existing complete tiara. We don't of course know whether it was gifted outright. Because of its [relative] umimportance from a royal perspective, it might have been an outright gift - after all, Sarah when she married Andrew received the outright gift of a tiara from the Queen. It was not of course a 'complete' piece with a royal provenance, but all the same, since I regard the Queen as always striving to be fair, it is possible that she might have thought that Sophie deserved outright ownership of the tiara - unless of course the Queen regards it as still having royal provenance despite its 'created nature'.

I am sorry this is so long, but hope that it helps,

Alex

[Warren]

Discussion of the wearing of tiaras at white tie/black tie events has been moved across to the Tiara history, traditions and protocols thread.

[Josefine]

did the frame of her wedding tiara change
it lloked golden at her wedding but is more grey/steel colour at least since the wedding in denmark 2004
see this at the first page in this thread

[IloveCP]

Shots of her gorgeous engagement ring:

Pic Pic2

I first I liked her wedding necklace but now I don't like it.I would have loved it if it was all white pearls.

[Baroness of Books]

Sophie's engagement ring is my favorite; a classic stunning diamond ring. And I've always disliked her pearl necklace, and for me to say that is sacriligious since I'm the original pearl girl, but the cross makes it too chunky. I'd have liked to have seen a classic pearl necklace on her. Any wonder why we haven't seen her wear that necklace since?

[muriel]

pic1, pic2

There has been a fair amount of debate and possibly, criticism, of Sophie's wedding tiara. Just wondered if Sophie altered it somewhat and added some pearls to it (as Mary of Denmark has), it might look like a more cohesive piece. I thought a base of pearls would give it some height, and a few more along the top, would improve the look considerably. Any ideas? Would one of our excellent Photoshop guru's be king enough to humour me?

[Baroness of Books]

That tiara needs a total revamping starting with that horrible base!

[Patra]

I actually like her engagement ring, where was it purchased, or what is the history behind it?

[muriel]

Originally Posted by Baroness of Books

That tiara needs a total revamping starting with that horrible base!

If there were to be a base of pearls (perhaps 2 rows of pearls), "that horrible base" can be hidden, and the tiara would get some additional height.

[Daria_S]

Sophie's engagement ring is absolutely stunning.

[Baroness of Books]

What I also dislike about Sophie's tiara are the gaps between the elements. It looks like peaks and valleys and just looks very out of proportion. If they added pearls to the base, perhaps some pearl additions in these spaces might work.

[IloveCP]

Originally Posted by Patra

I actually like her engagement ring, where was it purchased, or what is the history behind it?

Edward bought the ring from Garrards.That's all I know.

[muriel]

Originally Posted by Baroness of Books

What I also dislike about Sophie's tiara are the gaps between the elements. It looks like peaks and valleys and just looks very out of proportion. If they added pearls to the base, perhaps some pearl additions in these spaces might work.

I concur with you fully.