British Royal Jewels of the Past

[Saragli]

The Queen Mother unfortunatly sold it. I guess she and the Queen dont like amythest. I dont know why, I think the Parure is beautiful.

[kimebear]

Originally Posted by Princejohnny25

The Queen Mother unfortunatly sold it. I guess she and the Queen dont like amythest. I dont know why, I think the Parure is beautiful.

Another piece of historic jewelry that fell to the death duties. But I don't recall ever seeing the Queen Mum wearing it either.

[branchg]

Originally Posted by kimebear

Another piece of historic jewelry that fell to the death duties. But I don't recall ever seeing the Queen Mum wearing it either.

It really wasn't historical since Queen Mary acquired the stones in a charity auction and had a complete parure designed. Evidently, she only wore it once and then it disappeared. It was given to Queen Elizabeth as a gift at some point by Queen Mary.

The Queen Mother never wore it and auctioned the parure after The Queen declined it for the royal collection.

[justi]

Originally Posted by Princejohnny25

The Queen Mother unfortunatly sold it. I guess she and the Queen dont like amythest. I dont know why, I think the Parure is beautiful.

I think its just because the Windsors don't 'do' parures or at least the varieties including tiaras.

I also personally don't think Beatrice will be seen in a tiara for awhile yet, I don't think she will be attending any tiara events until William and Harry do first.

[felicia]

British Royals come of age at the age of 18 and that is when they can take the throne (without a regency) if need be. I know this because William IV was so happy to live long enough to see his niece Princess Victoria turn 18, so if he died she would be queen in her own right and not have her mother the Duchess of Kent as regent, because King William hated her.

[wymanda]

The Duchess of Gloucester - Turquoise Suite with Queen Mary's Pearl & Diamond Choker.

Countess of St Andrews - Cambridge Sapphire Parure

Lady Sarah Chatto - Triumph of Love Turquoise Tiara

[HRH Mims]

Wow wymanda, have you images of these jewels?

[ayvee]

Originally Posted by mims111

And has anyone infos about this Amethyst parure?

The necklace is available for sale from SJ Phillips.

Here's the photo link of the necklace:
http://www.sjphillips.com/antique_je...nd/03605a3.jpg

And their main page for diamond necklaces that shows a description of this necklace:
http://www.sjphillips.com/antique_je...necklaces.html
The necklace is at the very bottom of the first column.

-Ayvee

[HRH Mims]

Thank you very much Ayvee for the lovely pics and for infos. they helped me very much in making collection of royal jewels photos!

[SofiaM]

Ayvee,

good detective work, they do seem to be the same necklace. If it is, it has been changed. SJ Philips necklace is missing one bigger amethyst, most likely the clasp stone, it seems to have been replaced by a smaller one and with a different setting. Just a plain metal oval support, whereas all the other stones are surrounded by a row of small diamonds. It does not match.
Anyway I presume the pieces are no longer seen as a parure and meant to be sold together. Maybe taken for a ring? The necklace could sell in an easier way, the tiara may be more difficult.

[wymanda]

Originally Posted by mims111

Wow wymanda, have you images of these jewels?

The Gloucester Turquoise tiara (from "Tiaras, A history of splendour)




The "Flames of Love" Tiara



Queen Mary's Pearl Choker

[Prince of Chota]

Originally Posted by Warren

Here is a detail of Queen Alexandra's Coronation costume (Corbis) showing some of her amazing array of jewels, and more particularly the fringe 'girdle' or bordeur. Also note the huge diamond sunburst brooch in the centre of her décolletage.

Queen Alexandra's Diamond Bordeur

I'm fairly certain that is one of the fringe tiaras wore as a belt (there is another example of a tiara worn as a belt on Garrard's website, showing a peridot tiara of the Austrian Imperial family worn as such).

[Warren]

Originally Posted by Thomas Parkman

I am wondering if perhaps the diamond you put at the top on the first picture might work better or ever better still a large emerald as the central gemstone.

Thomas, you've missed the point. Faubla wasn't making a fantasy tiara, he was attempting to recreate how the tiara actually looked. Comparing his work with the originals, he has done an excellent job!

both images: copyright has expired

[xtan]

what happen to the two big stones in the original tiara?

[faubla2000]

The two big diamonds are cullinan III and IV and are now worn as a brooch by the Queen. The Delhi Durbar tiara had been created so that Quuen Mary could change the stones as she wanted (cambridge emeralds or diamonds). The cullinan V heart shaped diamond could also fit as the center piece of the tiara.
Laurent (aka Faubla2000) who is a boy BTW !!

[jcbcode99]

I may well be in the minority on this one, but I prefer the Delhi Durbar tiara the way it is now, as compared to it with emerald and the big diamonds. It's such a large piece as it is that having those large stones on it is really, IMO, just too much, and too busy looking. I really like it the way it is.

[magnik]

I don't say that the present DDT is terrible but I don't like the way how Camilla had wore it. It was opened too much.

Btw wasn't DDT with the stones wore by the Queen?

[iowabelle]

How very interesting, faubla. I didn't realize that the DDT is a circlet -- you can't see the back of it in most views. (The restored DDT might be a bit over the top for me -- but I'm not likely to have to wear it!)

[Thomas Parkman]

You are of course entirely correct, Warren. It is just that my memory of this particular object is that of another ??? setting. It now appears that they changed the gemstones about more than I was aware.

I am referring to a picture in which the central diamond appeared somewhat rounder than the version submitted by the noble Fabula. As I recall the Cullinan whatever on top has sixty carats and the Cullinan whatever in the center has ninety. Quite a large couple of chunks of stone if you will.

I cannot agree with the noble JBcode. I think the restoration of the emeralds restores that level of magnificence that the jewel had when it was first created. I do not care as much for the Cullinans being added to it. I think in the second picture of Queen Mary that you have shown, Warren, neither stone is present??? I think maybe a nice large emerald as the central stone would have worked much better.

But in any case Fabula is to be commended, thanked and congratulated for his good work, my carping to the contrary not withstanding. I am certainly delighted with the restoration of the emeralds indeed. Cheers.

[Sister Morphine]

I actually prefer the tiara without the emeralds and with the large diamond at the top. I'm not that big of a fan of emeralds, anyhow.