Princess Margaret Jewellery

[emeraldeyes]

Originally Posted by kelly9480

I don't doubt for a second Linley wants to get rich -- he seems obsessed by making money.

Can you expand on this?

[kelly9480]

Originally Posted by emeraldeyes

Can you expand on this?

In almost every interview he has done, Linley has commented on his constant desire to make money and complained that he is nowhere near as wealthy as people think he is. He sold his mother's retreat while she was alive (and possibly missed out on around 8 million pounds profit by doing so), he sold family Christmas cards the year his mother and grandmother died, he's selling this stuff now. He's not at all sentimental.

[emeraldeyes]

Originally Posted by kelly9480

In almost every interview he has done, Linley has commented on his constant desire to make money and complained that he is nowhere near as wealthy as people think he is. He sold his mother's retreat while she was alive (and possibly missed out on around 8 million pounds profit by doing so), he sold family Christmas cards the year his mother and grandmother died, he's selling this stuff now. He's not at all sentimental.

Could he perhaps be part Ferengi? I mean look at those ears!

[Prince of Chota]

While I love the Poltimore tiara and would love to see it remain in the family (and therefore in the public eye on official occasions), there are several other tiaras in Princess Margaret's family that are equally lovely and have a far longer connection to the royal family. And with the surprisingly meagre incomes that extended members of the royal family receive, I'm not in the least bit surprised with the sale. There are plenty more jewels in that family. The piece that I am most surprised by in the sale is Queen Mary's diamond riviere necklace, as I presumed that its provinence would keep it out of the auction catalogues. I must marvel, though, at the many ways in which the Poltimore tiara can be worn: in the full form, with the flowers as a necklace, and with the large scroll pieces as brooches. Wonderful!

[Lady Jean]

Originally Posted by Prince of Chota

...The piece that I am most surprised by in the sale is Queen Mary's diamond riviere necklace, as I presumed that its provinence would keep it out of the auction catalogues. ...

I am surprised too but they don't have much of a royal heritage other than Queen Mary had them from 1933 on, bequeathed to her by Lady Mount Stephen.

I was able to see the exhibit in New York and while I was struck by how huge those diamonds were and the magnificence of the Poltimore, I thought the quality of the multi-strand pearl necklace lot 118 was not so impressive. For example, the center pearl on the lowest strand had clearly visible bumps on it (for lack of a more technical jewelry term.) The "M" brooch was more modest than I expected but the small sapphire brooch (former pearl necklace clasp, lot 177) was absolutely stunning, much better than in the pictures. The Poltimore looked much older and delicate than I expected, and the gold setting more noticeable. It certainly is a showstopper.

[Warren]

Originally Posted by Lady Jean

I was able to see the exhibit in New York and while I was struck by how huge those diamonds were and the magnificence of the Poltimore... the Poltimore looked much older and delicate than I expected, and the gold setting more noticeable. It certainly is a showstopper.

Here is a detail from the Poltimore tiara.

courtesy Geoffrey Munn, "Tiaras: A History of Splendour", Antique Collectors' Club 2001
pic originally © By Gracious Permission of HRH The Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon.

The Poltimore Tiara (detail)

[Prince of Chota]

About the vacation home on Mustique that was mentioned on the previous page, I remember seeing it in an issue of Architectural Digest from a year or so ago. It had at that time changed hands (after HH's death), and had been renovated/remodelled for the then owner. Lovely place, really. Several separate pavillions in a kind of H shape if my memory serves me correctly, and wonderful views. Not very ostentatious, either, given the hedonistic reputation that Mustique had. I'll see if I can go back and find the article so I can let everyone know where to look it up. (I realise that this is quite off the topic of jewels, but I felt obligated to respond).

[sara1981]

i would have agree with posts because Princess Margaret's ex-hubby have rights for fights to christies because hard tell you about that i know her ex-hubby more respectives but im sure he would accept to sold of Margaret's jewels or not but we have wait and see what he says ok or not.

Margaret's son wanted sold his mother's jewels and her son would become rich and also Sarah because more remind of their mother very much but im sure lord snowdon wanted know about can sell or not.

if Princess Margaret would alives today

[future princess]

those are nice jewelries!!! too bad they sold them away. kelly9480 made linley sound greedy! if the princess margaret was still alive she would probably chose to die than see her valuables given away to other people just for her son to have lots of spending money.

[kelly9480]

According to Christie's, none of the pieces will be withdrawn, regardless of Snowdon's feelings.

[bluebess]

Emerald Eyes, thanks for the ferengi comment, I needed a good laugh!
I am sorry for the family that they must sell these items-I am sure if they didn't have to, they wouldn't.

[emeraldeyes]

Originally Posted by bluebess

Emerald Eyes, thanks for the ferengi comment, I needed a good laugh!

You're most welcome, I was wondering if anyone would 'get' it.

Here's a link to Hello!. It's the first mention of Linley's 'heavy heart' that I have seen. Poor dear.:p Sixth paragraph.

http://www.hellomagazine.com/royalty...ncessmargaret/

[HRHAmy]

This is sooo sad.:(

http://www.theroyalist.net/content/view/838/1/

[qui mal y pense]

Looking at the catalogue, there is just so MUCH STUFF. Where would David and Sara keep it all even if they wanted to. ALso many of the items are not things you would want if they weren't associated with royalty. I think Lord Snowdon may be upset just thinking about what personal items of HIS will be sold after he is gone. Maybe a trip to his solicitor is in order.

[lallyvee]

From ITV.com:

Margaret's jewels make almost £10m

Jewellery once owned by the Queen's sister, Princess Margaret has raised almost £10 million at an ongoing two-day auction.
So far, £9,597,680 has been raised, which will go towards paying Inheritance Tax on the late Princess's estate and will also go to charities, including the Princess Margaret Fund at the Stroke Association.
Items that have already gone under the hammer include her wedding tiara which sold for £926,400. Margaret's silver, furniture and works of art will be auctioned off later.
Helen Molesworth, a specialist at Christie's jewellery department who researched the history of the Princess's jewellery, described the auction as a "sale of a lifetime".
She said: "This is a one-off for my career, this is a sale of a lifetime. For me this is the epitome of the personal side of the Royal Family.
"We have the combination of Royal provenance and glamour which have a wonderful appeal to the British public."
Some of the pieces sold for 100 times their estimated value as jewellery collectors and fans of British royalty battled in the sale room to own one of her cherished jewellery items.
At the height of the sale around 1,000 buyers were packed into five sales rooms. Before the event started, 1,000 people left bids - and there were 500 collectors making bids by phone.
Star lots included a delicate Fabergé clock, a gift from Margaret's grandmother Queen Mary, which fetched £1,240,000, the highest price of the night, and a ring designed by the Princess featuring three rubies surrounded by diamonds, which made £299,200 despite an estimated price of up to £20,000.
The collection included pieces that were inherited, given or personally acquired by the Princess, who died in 2002, and reflected her celebrated style and elegance.
But the highlight of the night was Margaret's head jewellery the Poltimore tiara, which was originally created by Garrards in 1870 for Lady Poltimore, the wife of the second Baron Poltimore.
The Princess wore it on several occasions, including at her wedding to Lord Snowdon and, in its alternative form, as a diamond fringed necklace and scroll brooches prior to their marriage.
Bidding for this unique item was brisk starting at £200,000 and soon reaching £600,000 before one persistent buyer finally saw the hammer fall on her price.
Christie's said a private Asian buyer bought the Poltimore tiara while the Faberge clock went to an anonymous buyer.

[magnik]

Originally Posted by lallyvee

From ITV.com:

Margaret's jewels make almost £10m

Items that have already gone under the hammer include her wedding tiara which sold for £926,400.

Tiara ONLY for Ł926,400? I thought that will be more than Ł1000000.

Btw. all item was sold?

[kelly9480]

Originally Posted by magnik

Btw. all item was sold?

Everything that's already come up for auction has been sold, but the auction was divided into two sections. The other section is on sale today (Wednesday).

[magnik]

Originally Posted by kelly9480

Everything that's already come up for auction has been sold, but the auction was divided into two sections. The other section is on sale today (Wednesday).

Thanks kelly9480. Btw any news about today's sale?

[kelly9480]

Originally Posted by qui mal y pense

I think Lord Snowdon may be upset just thinking about what personal items of HIS will be sold after he is gone. Maybe a trip to his solicitor is in order.

He and Margaret divorced in 1978. None of HIS belongings should have been in her care by 2002. Besides, there was nothing in the catalogues that belonged to him. Everything was either a joint wedding present (which Margaret kept in the divorce) or a personal belonging of hers/

[qui mal y pense]

Originally Posted by kelly9480

He and Margaret divorced in 1978. None of HIS belongings should have been in her care by 2002. Besides, there was nothing in the catalogues that belonged to him. Everything was either a joint wedding present (which Margaret kept in the divorce) or a personal belonging of hers/

I wasn't referring to HIS items in her care but rather to HIS items being inherited by his children in the future.