The Duchess of Gloucester Jewellery


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Yes I have to say as much as I'd love to see the jewels return to the main line so we keep seeing them the reality is they are worth a lot of money so unless Charles or the Royal Collection is prepared to pay fair value for them why should the children just hand them over gratis.
 
We must appreciate the Duchess good jewellery taste as long as it lasts. When she has passed, hopefully many many years to come, most of this will be sold and never seen again. So I love that she always bring us her christmas-tree approach to jewellery wearing. My next wish is to see her complete turquoise parure of jewels, long time no see.
 
These jewels must be worth a fortune so I don't see the Gloucester kids just handing them to the royal collection. There will be an auction, no doubt, when their parents pass.
I concur. The Gloucester jewels will, in the fullness of time, end up being sold. The main line of the BRF are unlikely to want to pay top dollar for them, which they will get by selling at auction.
 
Yes I have to say as much as I'd love to see the jewels return to the main line so we keep seeing them the reality is they are worth a lot of money so unless Charles or the Royal Collection is prepared to pay fair value for them why should the children just hand them over gratis.
Well said.
 
I really hope they don't leave the country, it would be very sad. Even if they are acquired by the Belgians or another House, you don't know what will happen in the distant future, it could end up going out through branches and being sold or broken it down. Perhaps one set or two could go and the rest stay but what a choice. They seem like special pieces compared to a lot of Tiara sets they have a lot of character. I think it should all be kept somehow and the family be reimbursed full value.

It's an accident that caused them to have all of the Gloucetser stuff as William, Richards brother didn't have a family so they have been left with it all to look after instead of half. They would have been so shocked I guess it was probably the last thing anyone was thinking about for a long time. There will be costs in looking after the jewels and while the current family are working maybe that's helping but when they become a private family it will be possibly more expensive, unless someone does very well in business but that's for them. I think the Gloucesters have done a lot, a good steady family, worked hard, no scandals or bother to people, they seem genuine and staightforward. They should get help from Charles perhaps to pass the collection across if they want to but it will be up to them to decide. Fingers crossed it gets saved somehow here.
 
It wouldn’t surprise me if some of the more key pieces are left to the crown as I think the Duke &Duchess are very loyal. But I don’t think they should feel any pressure to unless Charles, William or The Royal Collection are prepared to offer them at least market value.
 
It wouldn’t surprise me if some of the more key pieces are left to the crown as I think the Duke &Duchess are very loyal. But I don’t think they should feel any pressure to unless Charles, William or The Royal Collection are prepared to offer them at least market value.
Yes it should be fair. Finances are private and I don't like to mention it but I gather that when David left the brothers had to club together to buy-out his share of Sandringham and Balmoral as they where private properties and he needed money to go on. Even Princess Mary's husband, the Earl of Harwood may have had to help. I've no idea of they ever got any money back from this as the Gloucesters and Harwoods didn't live there just visited. The Gloucesters had their own house not far from Peterbrough an hour or more from Sandringham and went to many places in Scotland as well as Balmoral in summer times. To my knowledge George and Marina, although very charming, social, family focussed and friendly, spent a lot of money during their marriage compared to Henry and his sister Mary, so I'm not sure if they pitched in at that point. So maybe the family could be owed a wee bit of extra help back.

I think there is one smaller tiara made for Princess Alice by her father and that I hope stays with the family as I think that might feel close. I hope it stays together.
 
Yes it should be fair. Finances are private and I don't like to mention it but I gather that when David left the brothers had to club together to buy-out his share of Sandringham and Balmoral as they where private properties and he needed money to go on. Even Princess Mary's husband, the Earl of Harwood may have had to help. I've no idea of they ever got any money back from this as the Gloucesters and Harwoods didn't live there just visited. The Gloucesters had their own house not far from Peterbrough an hour or more from Sandringham and went to many places in Scotland as well as Balmoral in summer times. To my knowledge George and Marina, although very charming, social, family focussed and friendly, spent a lot of money during their marriage compared to Henry and his sister Mary, so I'm not sure if they pitched in at that point. So maybe the family could be owed a wee bit of extra help back.

I think there is one smaller tiara made for Princess Alice by her father and that I hope stays with the family as I think that might feel close. I hope it stays together.
If there was any money owing to the Gloucesters and other siblings, I am sure that debt would have been settled over the last 88 years. And if it hasn't been settled so far, one would imagine there isn't an expectation for it to do so.
 
I really hope they don't leave the country, it would be very sad. Even if they are acquired by the Belgians or another House, you don't know what will happen in the distant future, it could end up going out through branches and being sold or broken it down. Perhaps one set or two could go and the rest stay but what a choice. They seem like special pieces compared to a lot of Tiara sets they have a lot of character. I think it should all be kept somehow and the family be reimbursed full value.

It's an accident that caused them to have all of the Gloucetser stuff as William, Richards brother didn't have a family so they have been left with it all to look after instead of half. They would have been so shocked I guess it was probably the last thing anyone was thinking about for a long time. There will be costs in looking after the jewels and while the current family are working maybe that's helping but when they become a private family it will be possibly more expensive, unless someone does very well in business but that's for them. I think the Gloucesters have done a lot, a good steady family, worked hard, no scandals or bother to people, they seem genuine and staightforward. They should get help from Charles perhaps to pass the collection across if they want to but it will be up to them to decide. Fingers crossed it gets saved somehow here.
Lovely as the Gloucester jewellery collection is, I can't see pieces have not been BRF "mainline" pieces for a very long time. If I am not mistaken, most were bought by Queen Mary in her lifetime, before being presented to Princess Alice. So to that extent, they are not significant from a British historic perspective.
 
I think her most important tiara is the one she has, that was left to her husband by Princess Marie Louise of Schleswig Holstein.
 
I think her most important tiara is the one she has, that was left to her husband by Princess Marie Louise of Schleswig Holstein.
The Cartier Indian tiara, left by Marie Louise to her godson, Richard Gloucester, is lovely. It has presence, it has scale, and has a certain density that makes it very special. But it is not historically significant. Either to the UK as a whole, or the BRF. And from that perspective, if it were to be sold at auction to the highest bidder to raise a fortune for the Gloucester children, I see no wrong in that.
 
Lovely as the Gloucester jewellery collection is, I can't see pieces have not been BRF "mainline" pieces for a very long time. If I am not mistaken, most were bought by Queen Mary in her lifetime, before being presented to Princess Alice. So to that extent, they are not significant from a British historic perspective.
I think the only historic important ones would be the turquoise Parure which goes back to Queen Mary's parents, and the honeysuckle tiara which was made for Queen Mary, but i think she wore it not that often.
 
Yes it should be fair. Finances are private and I don't like to mention it but I gather that when David left the brothers had to club together to buy-out his share of Sandringham and Balmoral as they where private properties and he needed money to go on. Even Princess Mary's husband, the Earl of Harwood may have had to help. I've no idea of they ever got any money back from this as the Gloucesters and Harwoods didn't live there just visited. The Gloucesters had their own house not far from Peterbrough an hour or more from Sandringham and went to many places in Scotland as well as Balmoral in summer times. To my knowledge George and Marina, although very charming, social, family focussed and friendly, spent a lot of money during their marriage compared to Henry and his sister Mary, so I'm not sure if they pitched in at that point. So maybe the family could be owed a wee bit of extra help back.

I think there is one smaller tiara made for Princess Alice by her father and that I hope stays with the family as I think that might feel close. I hope it stays together.
I have never read before that the brothers had to club together to buy Balmoral and Sandringham,> Once Bertie became King George V1 he would have had access to the Duchy of Lancaster so therefore would have been in a position to buy back the properties. I believe David also received a pension from the BRF. I would be interested to know where your information is documented as it would make interesting reading.
As for George and Marina , he died during the war and it has been well documented that in royal terms they were not well off, Princess Alexandra herself has spoken of receiving clothes from Elizabeth and Margaret when she was a child.
 
I concur. The Gloucester jewels will, in the fullness of time, end up being sold. The main line of the BRF are unlikely to want to pay top dollar for them, which they will get by selling at auction.
This is maybe why in more recent times the jewels are ' on loan' rather than gifted.
 
This is maybe why in more recent times the jewels are ' on loan' rather than gifted.
And it makes complete sense to loan jewellery these days. Cadet branches have little use for the jewellery after the generation of working royals, and would much rather have the cash to support their lifestyles.
 
Anyone here that knows when was the last time Birgitte wore the turquoise tiara and matching pieces of jewellery? I can not recall seeing it for many years. Same with the very nice and large pearl choker from Queen Mary.
 
I have never read before that the brothers had to club together to buy Balmoral and Sandringham,> Once Bertie became King George V1 he would have had access to the Duchy of Lancaster so therefore would have been in a position to buy back the properties. I believe David also received a pension from the BRF. I would be interested to know where your information is documented as it would make interesting reading.
As for George and Marina , he died during the war and it has been well documented that in royal terms they were not well off, Princess Alexandra herself has spoken of receiving clothes from Elizabeth and Margaret when she was a child.
This is mostly my understanding as well. The pension the Duke of Windsor received was to compensate him for Sandringham and Balmoral, George VI did not have enough cash on hand to buy Sandringham and Balmoral outright in 1936, but not only would he have the Duchy of Lancaster income coming in, since he did not have a son, he had the Duchy of Cornwall income as well. I don't recall George VI getting funding from his brothers to help him settle things with the Duke of Windsor. If he needed additional funding, my guess is that he would not have had to go any further than his mother.

I am pretty sure they lived well, but I don't recall the Kents being spendthrifts. I don't think that the Gloucesters did anything super-strategic that resulted in their better financial position vis a vis the Kents. Prince George, the Duke of Kent's premature death, along with having a wife who, while royal, was not wealthy is why jewels and other assets had to be sold, and from there the remaining assets had to be divided between their three children.

Prince Henry, the Duke of Gloucester married a woman from a wealthy family, although I have no reason to believe that she received a large inheritance, and sadly one of their two sons died prematurely, so the jewels and other assets did not have to be divvied up. I knew that the spectacular Cartier India Tiara was a gift but I was struck by the fact that the Prince Henry gifted his wife Princess Alice with quite a bit of jewelry. Perhaps I should not have been surprised, since he is Queen Mary's son. 💎👑

I agree with the point that others are making that the Gloucesters should not give the jewels to the BRF and not sell them for anything less than market value, and I don't see the BRF doing that. I can at least conceive of Chales and Camilla acquiring a bauble or two since they seem to appreciate fine jewelry, but not to be morbid, the Gloucesters will likely outlive them. And yeah, as gorgeous as some of the pieces are, they really do not significant provenance. To me the only hope will be if some of the jewels can be used to settle tax obligations, which is what happened with the Fife Tiara, which also, while a beautiful piece of jewelry, it did not have much provenance either.
 
I've never heard of the brothers all chipping in to "buy back" Sandringham and Balmoral. Anything I have read, including the diaries of "Tommy" Lascelles, say it was George VI who had to do that. He says that Edward VIII got left Balmoral, Sandringham, the stamp collection etc but no real cash and everything was tied up and couldn't be sold off, the other three brothers (future George VI, George Duke of Kent, Henry Gloucester) all got left about £750,000 in cash - about £45million todays money. (No mention of Princess Mary btw) It is said George VI paid £350,000 to his brother for Sandringham and Balmoral and it is often mentioned he paid Edward VIII for "his life interest in Balmoral and Sandringham" or words to that affect which makes me think they were tied up so couldn't be sold outright so the price reflected less than their complete value as an asset.

The Guardian recently estimated that the previous Duke of Gloucester (the current Duke's father) left a will of about £5.6million (todays money) in 1974 based on probate records.The current Duke's elder brother who died in 1972 left an estate worth £3.9million (todays money).

The Gloucesters are by no means poor, but also not hugely cash rich. Their children and grandchildren will easily be very comfortably off as they all seem to work and have their own incomes but can also rely on some solid family money.

The Gloucesters came of better than the Kent's (if indeed they did) likely just to do having less children to divide the jewels and wealth between and yes, Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester came from a wealthy landed Scottish family - she was the daughter of the Duke of Buccleuch who was at the time the largest landowner in Scotland. This likely meant there were many generous gifts over the years.
Also remember the previous Duke of Kent died when his children were young - the current Duke was just six years old - and so the family had to reply on their wealth up to that point to support them for a long long time.

I think we have to accept we will certainly not see all the Gloucester jewels in the long future. Yes some may well be used in lieu of tax but the Fife jewels have provenance going back a long way, longer than many of the Gloucester's tiaras. But that isn't to say it won't happen and would be something of a win-win for us and the family ;-)
 
I was struck by the fact that the Prince Henry gifted his wife Princess Alice with quite a bit of jewelry. Perhaps I should not have been surprised, since he is Queen Mary's son.
Not Henry, I have heard, but QM herself, supposedly to thank Alice for taking him on and “managing” him. (I suppose that while Prince George was highly-wayward yet handsome, cultured, and charming, Harry must have seemed like not-much-less-wayward and far less of a catch. And since QM was originally meant to be in that situation with Prince Eddy… [which was something of a fascination for PH apparently as he talked to James Pope-Hennessy about it]).

At any rate, I don’t think Harry Gloucester had the appreciation or the eye for fine jewels to be able to select some of his wife’s pieces.
 
Not Henry, I have heard, but QM herself, supposedly to thank Alice for taking him on and “managing” him. (I suppose that while Prince George was highly-wayward yet handsome, cultured, and charming, Harry must have seemed like not-much-less-wayward and far less of a catch. And since QM was originally meant to be in that situation with Prince Eddy… [which was something of a fascination for PH apparently as he talked to James Pope-Hennessy about it]).

At any rate, I don’t think Harry Gloucester had the appreciation or the eye for fine jewels to be able to select some of his wife’s pieces.
Queen Mary is rightfully given credit for gifting her daughters-in-law with jewelry. I am just acknowledging that Prince Henry also contributed to the Gloucester trove. Of course his mother could have assisted him with his selections. My recollection is that Henry was a friend of Alice's brother and both were getting up in age, they were in their thirties, and decided to settle down with each other.
 
Most of the tiaras and other major jewellery we see Birgitte wear today will as many have said, in the fullness of time be sold.m, as her children and grandchildren will have more need for the money, than for lots of jewels they will never have any opportunity to wear…

The King may help them keep selected pieces they can use frequently, like Margarets family was helped to keep selected pieces… But most of what we see today will no longer be seen when Birgitte has passed away…
 
Yes there were a few too many necklaces on the Duchess of Gloucester ,the old saying less is more!
 
I think she looks fine. They are under her jacket, so they aren't really in your face.
 
There are a few too many for my taste, but let’s celebrate a Duchess who enjoys her jewellery collection and on most occasions gets it spot on. There’s a few significant items in her collection that we may never see again, as the next generation may sell them or find no reason to wear them.
 
Most of the tiaras and other major jewellery we see Birgitte wear today will as many have said, in the fullness of time be sold.m, as her children and grandchildren will have more need for the money, than for lots of jewels they will never have any opportunity to wear…

The King may help them keep selected pieces they can use frequently, like Margarets family was helped to keep selected pieces… But most of what we see today will no longer be seen when Birgitte has passed away…
Should the current king and queen out live the Gloucesters I’m sure any jewels that are kept in the main line will be paid for fully. King Charles isn’t so much younger than the duke and enjoy a very warm relationship. They have carried out their roles spectacularly over their marriage and if memory serves me right they spent the last Christmas with QEII and Charles and Camilla.

How close they are with William I don’t know, and I don’t think William would want the optics of purchasing jewels when he ascends to the throne.

The days of magpie Queen Mary will be sadly forgotten. However hopefully Princess Marie Louise tiara makes it to the V and A so we can all enjoy it.
 
Back
Top Bottom