Kent Jewels


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Is Princess Michael the only person, who sold the family jewels to pay for expenses and wears the costume ones? What were the reasons for not sending another better couple to represent the British Royal family?
Given the usual venom and sneer, it would be better for the couple to abstain from making any solo appearances on behalf of the British royal family.
 
Last edited:
:previous:

Please could I help with a little bit of information, people - [minor] royals or non-royals - are never sent 'to represent royalty generally, but instead represent specific members of the British Royal Family.

In the present case, I do not think that Prince and Princess Michael of Kent were there in a representative capacity or as invited guests in their own right. I rather get the impression that they were there in their own right as invited guests - as borne out by the Court Circular entry.

As for costume jewellery: nothing wrong with it per se, although I do think that PMK's necklace looked a bit Over the Top and therefore unreal and I also think for this reason it was perhaps a little bit unsuitable to be worn in the way it was for such an occasion. Which is of course ONLY my opinion.

Alex
 
Last edited:
Let's see, the pearls appear to be about 20mm. For a SINGLE white, perfect pearl of that size, one would have to shell out somewhere around USD10,000. To my eye, the bow brooches don't look real.

Had the piece(s) been smaller, the effect would have been very pretty --- real or not.
 
SOoooo, sue me. :lol: I thought she looked very nice. Now, if she had been "dripping diamonds" I might have a question/quarrel, but since that is not the case, I will just say that I think she looked very nice. After all, how many of us are able to flash family jewels of great import?:ROFLMAO:
 
I read somewhere that their jewels were in some kind of trust and therefore couldn't be sold...I am not sure,but I think Prince Michael stated this...
 
The most valuable jewels would be the pieces Princess Michael received from The Duchess of Windsor as wedding gifts. If she really needed money, that's what she would sell-off as the Windsor jewels command quite a premium price at auctions.

The royal pieces belong to The Duke of Kent, who inherited all of his mother's jewels as the eldest son, with the exception of the pieces left to Princess Alexandra. They are merely loans to Princess Michael and can never be sold without The Duke's permission.
 
I remember the accusation of Princess Michael's jewels being paste appeared only once in the book "Theirs is the Kingdom" in 1987 and was shot down in flames by the Kent's themselves who angrily put out a statement saying that all the jewels belonging to Prince Michael are in trust for his children so the Princess couldn't sell them even if she wanted to as they are, officially, not her property to dispense with.

I knew I read somewhere this story about the trust and Michael Kent jewels...
 
Last edited:
branchg said:
The most valuable jewels would be the pieces Princess Michael received from The Duchess of Windsor as wedding gifts. If she really needed money, that's what she would sell-off as the Windsor jewels command quite a premium price at auctions.

The royal pieces belong to The Duke of Kent, who inherited all of his mother's jewels as the eldest son, with the exception of the pieces left to Princess Alexandra. They are merely loans to Princess Michael and can never be sold without The Duke's permission.

In fact the jewels along with other items were left to Prince Michael by his Mother, Princess Marina, just as she did to each of her three children. The jewellery is however held in trust for the children - Lord Frederick & Lady Gabriella, the ownership does lie with Prince Michael.
In the recent sale of Kent belongings the jewels given to Princess Michael by the Duchess of Windsor were not sold. The most valuable jewels came from Princess Marina.
 
Its not often that M-C gets to host an event related to a State visit, so I guess this is her opportunity to play the part. She also does not have any royal orders, so she does have to find her own baubles to play dressing up.

Please could I help with a little information?

The Banquet was in fact NOT hosted by Princess Michael of Kent. It was hosted by the Lord Mayor and took place at the Guildhall in the City of London.

You are quite right, the banquet is hosted by the Lord mayor. What I meant to say (and clearly did not word accurately) is that not often does M-C get the opportunity to be the senior most royal at an event associated with the state visit.
 
Is Princess Michael the only person, who sold the family jewels to pay for expenses and wears the costume ones? What were the reasons for not sending another better couple to represent the British Royal family?
Given the usual venom and sneer, it would be better for the couple to abstain from making any solo appearances on behalf of the British royal family.

I actually thought M-C looked very grand, said in the nicest possible way. I think it is wonderful how creative she is with her jewels (eg, the necklace she put together for the wedding of Freddie and Sophie), andd this was just another example.
 
It is easy to forget that Prince Michaels' maternal grandmother was a russian Grand Duchess. The pearl necklace may well have come from that quarter. GD Helen sold the most valuable item of her jewels, the GD Vladimir Tiara, to Queen Mary but she may well have been able to keep some serious pearls that passed to her youngest daughter, Princess Marina.
 
GD Helen had a quite valuable collection of jewelleryand she had been photographed or portraited (?) wearing most of her collection but never this piece, so it don't think it came from her. Besides, she made really valuable gifts to her eldest daughters upon their marriage ( Olga got two tiaras from her and Elisabeth her mother's fringe , and perhaps some necklaces) , so there weren't much grand pieces left in her casette when Marina's turn came who "only" got the girandole earrings, the large bow brooch and the pearl headband (the pains of being youngest daughter :D). Plus, I don't think that Marina was ever photogrephes in this piece
 
Yes but would two strands of, granted largeish, pearls have been commented on in the 1930's when every well bred lady had at least two strands of pearls? They may also have come from Queen Mary. In her later years she even softened and gave the Duke of Windsor pearls for his Duchess to wear.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It is easy to forget that Prince Michaels' maternal grandmother was a russian Grand Duchess. The pearl necklace may well have come from that quarter. GD Helen sold the most valuable item of her jewels, the GD Vladimir Tiara, to Queen Mary but she may well have been able to keep some serious pearls that passed to her youngest daughter, Princess Marina.

My own view is that M-C put the pearls and brooches together for the evening. They probably were used differently prior to the event, and will probably be used differently going forward.
 
muriel said:
My own view is that M-C put the pearls and brooches together for the evening. They probably were used differently prior to the event, and will probably be used differently going forward.

HRH has worn these pearls in this way many times - in the 1980's she wore them so and has continued to do so .
 
You are quite right, the banquet is hosted by the Lord mayor. What I meant to say (and clearly did not word accurately) is that not often does M-C get the opportunity to be the senior most royal at an event associated with the state visit.


I thought that was what you probably meant, Muriel. Thanks for the clarification :flowers:

I have to say that I found this Banquet quite interesting. Usually with State Visits, the visiting foreign dignitary attends the State Banquet given in his / her honour by the Queen and then, by custom, s/he then usuallyy hosts a 'return match' either at his own Embassy / High Commission / Ofiicial Residence or, if that is not large enough, at a suitably grand London hotel, often Claridges, which gives another chance to see a large turnout of members of the BRF. This time, we had to be content with the Banquet hosted by the Lord Mayor!

Alex
 
Last edited:
I thought that was what you probably meant, Muriel. Thanks for the clarification :flowers:

I have to say that I found this Banquet quite interesting. Usually with State Visits, the visiting foreign dignitary attends the State Banquet given in his / her honour by the Queen and then, by custom, s/he then usuallyy hosts a 'return match' either at his own Embassy / High Commission / Ofiicial Residence or, if that is not large enough, at a suitably grand London hotel, often Claridges, which gives another chance to see a large turnout of members of the BRF. This time, we had to be content with the Banquet hosted by the Lord Mayor!

Alex

Am I right in thinking that increasingly there are fewer return banquets, and increasingly there are a lot more banquets at the Guildhall hosted by the Lord Mayor, and often have the Gloucesters in attendance?
 
Am I right in thinking that increasingly there are fewer return banquets, and increasingly there are a lot more banquets at the Guildhall hosted by the Lord Mayor, and often have the Gloucesters in attendance?

While I like the Gloucester couple it is getting very predictable that they are the Royals at the Guildhall banquet. It was really nice to see Prince Michael & Marie-Christine.

Perhaps in the future William & Catherine will take up this role.
 
Am I right in thinking that increasingly there are fewer return banquets, and increasingly there are a lot more banquets at the Guildhall hosted by the Lord Mayor, and often have the Gloucesters in attendance?


The Lord Mayor's Banquet is a fairly standard 'fixture' in a State visit Muriel. So far as the 'return match' is concerned, yes, these do seem to be getting fewer and fewer, but it might be because recent state visits over the past few years have involved more 'smaller' and/or 'poorer' [for want of a better word] than larger ones. Usually, and remember that I do talk in generalisations, countries such as the US and Canada have the facilities and the money to entertain, and quite lavishly as well! I think in the past few years that the the most recent 'raising of eyebrows' over a 'failure' [if one can term it such, because there is abolutely NO requirement to host a 'return fixture'] to host a 'return match' was when President Sarkozy announced that he did not want to have a State visit of 'normal' duration, and trotted back off to La Belle France ASAP!!! He actually returned on the night that he would have been expected to host a return bash - over the years, the French Emabssy in London has been the venue of some pretty impressive formal parties. The talk in London at the time was that President Sarkozy's wife Carla [who had only recently married him, some say becuase of the impending State visit, as she did not want to attend as a 'mistress'] was still very uneasy about the formal side of her role as wife to the President, and therefore wanted to spend the minimum amount of time possible on the State Visit. Of course, I have no way of knowing whether this rumour was true or not.........

Alex
 
Last edited:
In the past 4 weeks alone she has represented the Royal Family with her husband at this event and at St. Paul's Cathedral on Remembrance Sunday as well as representing Prince Philip on her own at an official engagement in Italy. I just don't get why the Queen ask's her to do these things yet still dosn't give her the Family Order. Fingers crossed she will get it this jubilee year coming.
 
At the end of the day it (the Royal Family Order) is in the Queen's personal gift and she dosn't have to justify to anyone why she has given it nor does the recipient have to explain why she has received it.
 
Emeralds

Princess Michael attending the memorial service for the late Queen Mother and Princess Margaret, 30 March 2012.

Princess Michael of Kent

Wearing what appears to be a rather smart diamond and emerald clover leaf brooch.

v brooch enlarged slightly
Image cropped from larger photograph

 

Attachments

  • Brooch.jpg
    Brooch.jpg
    11.4 KB · Views: 794
Last edited:
Thanks for the photo!
Pearls are quite lovely.
 
I love those huge pearl earrings and necklace; they look almost a blush color similar to her suit. And the brooch is just lovely; looks like there's nice detail in that.
 
wymanda said:
Yes but would two strands of, granted largeish, pearls have been commented on in the 1930's when every well bred lady had at least two strands of pearls? They may also have come from Queen Mary. In her later years she even softened and gave the Duke of Windsor pearls for his Duchess to wear.

Wow, that blew me over! Where did you learn this about Queen Mary , wymanda?
 
Very nice; thanks for the link, cepe. The necklace looks like it could be comprised of emerald beads along with the pearls.
 
Back
Top Bottom