The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   Royal Jewels (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f20/)
-   -   British Royal Jewels of the Past (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f20/british-royal-jewels-of-the-past-7698.html)

emsaeva 01-25-2004 01:21 AM

British Royal Jewels of the Past
 
< ed - broken link >

Do you think Her Majesty would let me borrow the Kokoshink Tiara? :lol:

A.C.C. 01-27-2004 10:01 PM

When the current Duchess of Gloucester, Duchess of Kent and Princess Michael of Kent die, what will happen to their very historic tiaras? Personally, I think they should be given to whoever is monarch at the time so that they have a chance to be worn because the children of these women probably won&#39;t have the chance to wear tiaras as often as the people who will be the main members of the royal family at that point. If you don&#39;t know what will happen to those jewels, what do you think will or should happen to them?

Fireweaver 04-05-2004 10:34 PM

Apparently the Queen Mum had some debts that needed paying off. She had a lot of valuable items, but not a lot of actual cash.
Here&#39;s the description of the parure, from the Royal Jewels of the World Website

By Tradition from the Collection of a European Royal Family

An Attractive Amethyst And Diamond Parure
19th Century

comprising: a Tiara, circa 1815, of Empire style,
the tapered band with cushioned-shaped amethysts
bordered by similarly shaped diamonds, later
fittings and several repairs; a Necklace, circa 1815,
designed as a row of ten oval amethysts graduated
in size from the front and each bordered by cushion-
shaped diamonds and connected by diamond quatrefoil
motifs, the front supporting detachable pear-shaped
amethyst drops, four of which are briolette, all the
clusters are detachable; a pair of Earrings of
similar design, early 19th Century; and a Ring,
last quarter of the 19th Century, slightly imperfect.

&#036;75,000 - &#036;125,000 USD / 115,000 - 190,000 SF

http://royal-jewels3.tripod.com/auction/amethyst.html

gogm 04-06-2004 12:31 AM

There was a picture of Queen Alexandra in a heavily ornamented dress. Renaissance revival balls were very popular then. It was a chance for the aristocracy to dress even more lavishly than they normally did (&#33;). I wouldn&#39;t be surprised if she wore it at the Devonshire House costume ball in 1897. The Victoria and Albert has photos from Lafayette Studios of many socialites of the era at this party (as well as photos for her husband&#39;s coronation, debuts, openings of Parliament, etc. that are often breathtaking), including her husband, but none linking her to this party. It&#39;s at:

http://www.lafayette.150m.com/dhblist.html

wymanda 06-08-2004 07:49 AM

Queen Mary

http://lafayette.150m.com/mar9034b.html

tiaraprin 06-08-2004 11:38 PM

I have a couple of questions about Diana&#39;s jewelry that I have not been able to answer--maybe someone on here knows the answers I seek.

Where did Diana get the ameythyst 2 row choker with the diamond/amethyst center and the matching earrings?

Where did the beautiful long drop aquamarine and diamond earrings she wore come from. She famously wore these earrings in Cannes in 1987 with her "Grace Kelly" look.

Just before Diana died, she wore a stupendous diamond and pearl necklace with an ice blue dress. I cannot find where that came from too.

kelly9480 06-08-2004 11:53 PM

The Kent and Gloucester jewels will either remain with the Kents and Gloucesters or will be sold. When the Kents sold a historic tiara, EIIR didn't bother buying it. There is no history of giving the jewels back to the main line when there are descendants who could inherit them.

The Harewood jewels remained with the Harewoods or were auctioned at several sales. None went back to the Windsors.

tiaraprin 06-08-2004 11:58 PM

really Kelly?? I would have imagined that Her Majesty would have wanted them back considering the connection to Queen Mary and to pass them to a new generation of royal princesses.

kelly9480 06-09-2004 12:16 AM

She was reported to have said they had too much jewellery already.

The tiara shape was rather old-fashioned and probably wouldn't have been worn often anyways because the rest of the parure stayed with the Kents.

Poppy 06-09-2004 08:53 AM

When the jewels are given to a member of the royal family, it's given. If the Queen liked them, she would need to approach this person and try to negotiate a price^^ Dont think there is anyone who would "donate" their jewels (properties) other than the most common reason which is "for charity"^^

I think we should stand at the owners' point of view. These days, junior members aren't very rich and they view their jewels they inherited from their ancestors a very important part of their wealth.

kelly9480 06-09-2004 11:34 AM

It doesn&#39;t matter whether we think the jewels should go back to the main line; they don&#39;t agree with us. And since the Windsors refuse to create a family foundation, like in some countries, jewels are going to keep leaving the family.

They see their jewels as part of their wealth and heritage, and also a way to meet death duties, because they don&#39;t have a lot of cash at hand, and don&#39;t have really spectacular artwork they can donate in lieu of cash. They have their homes, their jewels, some minor artworks that probably aren&#39;t going to cover the death duties, and stock options.

Elspeth 06-09-2004 02:08 PM

There are going to be major death duties to pay when the Duke of Gloucester dies since he still owns Barnwell as well as all that jewellery. Since his daughters and daughter in law aren&#39;t living the sorts of lives where major jewellery is essential, it&#39;s likely that tiaras and other pieces of jewellery will be used to pay the estate tax, as happened with Princess Mary, rather than selling Barnwell. I assume the same situation, although to probably a lesser extent, applies to the Kents.

Poppy 06-10-2004 08:30 AM

What are death duties??? Sounds like "death" is even taxed in UK. Maybe it&#39;s there to help to create more balance between the rich and the ordinaries, but I really dont like the sight of seeing people die and their family gets alot less wealthy.

The jewels of the minor royals are not part of the British Crown Jewels. I really think if the senior royalties wants to own them, they should pay the price. UK is a capitalist country.

kelly9480 06-10-2004 11:27 AM

Death duties are taxes paid on a deceased person's estate. People can place their belongings in trusts, and pass ownership to someone else before their deaths to try to get around them

Elspeth 06-10-2004 07:14 PM

Death duties are the same as estate tax. In the UK I think about a quarter of a million pounds is exempt, and then tax is due on the balance of the estate at a rate of something like 40%.

Poppy 06-11-2004 03:33 AM

Does this mean, alot of wealthy people gets a lot less wealthy by those taxes?

kelly9480 06-11-2004 11:45 AM

Most wealthy people put their belongings in trusts to avoid death duties. They also pass things on before they die. They end up paying death duties, but it doesn&#39;t put a significant dent in their family wealth because of the loopholes they make use of.

wymanda 06-16-2004 10:42 PM

Some time ago we discussed the Turkish necklace which Queen Victoria wore at her wedding and the christening of her eldest child. The piece passed out of the royal family when QV left it to her son the Duke of Connaught. Is it possible that this piece, pictured in the link below, passed to either Lady Patricia Ramsay (born Princess Patricia of Connaught) or to the Swedish royals through Princess Margaret of Connaught who was mother to Denmark&#39;s Queen Ingrid. If so and if Ingrid inherited it we may see Mary wear this emotive jewel.

http://www.jewelrybyrhonda.com/queen_victoria5.jpg

kelly9480 06-17-2004 03:54 AM

If the Swedes/Danes had inherited it, we would have seen it by now, simply because between all of Crown Princess Margaret&#39;s collection was worn, dismantled or sold. Ingrid inherited the majority of her mother&#39;s jewels and she was never seen with this necklace. It may have gone to Patricia, but from her, who knows where it may be.

kelly9480 06-18-2004 04:01 AM

I thought that one EIIR is wearing was a gift from someone. It may have been a bequest from LPR. Are there any photos of her wearing it before LPR died in the 1970s?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:02 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises