Distribution of the Jewels of Queen Elizabeth II

[Granada]

Thanks SirGyamfi, I have been baffled as to WHERE some of Diana's iconic pieces are. Something magnificent, like her pearl choker Necklace with the giant sapphire ? The Queen Mother gave her the sapphire as a Wedding Gift.

Diana had other lovely Pearls choker style necklaces that she was fond of. Her sisters did too. Lovely, but hardly iconic. But where are they ? Meghan has worn some dinky butterfly earrings, the gorgeous aquamarine ring, the watch and a diamond tennis bracelet.

I find it curious. Catherine wears the sapphire and diamond earrings of which there are two sets, as well as having worn the stunning emerald And diamond choker.
I'd love to know the story...... What happened to everything else ?

 

[muriel]

And as good it is to keep the collection together it think somethinkg like a string of Pearls or a smaller brooch could have been given to the granddaughters of Elizabeth II.

And it may well have been, we just do not know. Neither pearls nor brooches are popular with the young, so it may be that the grand daughters have received such jewellery, and they haven't worn it in public.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

Thanks SirGyamfi, I have been baffled as to WHERE some of Diana's iconic pieces are. Something magnificent, like her pearl choker Necklace with the giant sapphire ? The Queen Mother gave her the sapphire as a Wedding Gift.

Diana had other lovely Pearls choker style necklaces that she was fond of. Her sisters did too. Lovely, but hardly iconic. But where are they ? Meghan has worn some dinky butterfly earrings, the gorgeous aquamarine ring, the watch and a diamond tennis bracelet.

I find it curious. Catherine wears the sapphire and diamond earrings of which there are two sets, as well as having worn the stunning emerald And diamond choker.
I'd love to know the story...... What happened to everything else ?

I think they are in a trust/bank vault. The emerald and diamond choker belonged to Queen Mary, I assume that one was loaned and returned to the royal vaults.

 

[muriel]

Thanks SirGyamfi, I have been baffled as to WHERE some of Diana's iconic pieces are. Something magnificent, like her pearl choker Necklace with the giant sapphire ? The Queen Mother gave her the sapphire as a Wedding Gift.

Diana had other lovely Pearls choker style necklaces that she was fond of. Her sisters did too. Lovely, but hardly iconic. But where are they ? Meghan has worn some dinky butterfly earrings, the gorgeous aquamarine ring, the watch and a diamond tennis bracelet.

I find it curious. Catherine wears the sapphire and diamond earrings of which there are two sets, as well as having worn the stunning emerald And diamond choker.
I'd love to know the story...... What happened to everything else ?

The items of jewellery belonging to the Queen (including the Queen Mary Lovers Knot tiara and the Delhi Durbar emerald choker) would have been returned to the Queen after Diana's death.

The jewellery personally belonging to Diana would probably have been divided by William and Harry at some stage. Catherine and Meghan have both worn some of the jewellery previously used by Diana. I am not quite sure where the pearl choker with the massive sapphire is. I would hope it is with William, and I would love to see Catherine use it at some stage.

 

[Kaye1850]

No tiara that Diana wore belongs to the RC. Diana’s jewels aren’t part of the RC Trust.

The Cambridge Lovers Knot tiara, I believe, is part of the Royal Collection.

 

[muriel]

The Cambridge Lovers Knot tiara, I believe, is part of the Royal Collection.

That is incorrect, it was owned personally by QE2, and presumably, is now owned by HM King Charles.

 

[Kaye1850]

That is incorrect, it was owned personally by QE2, and presumably, is now owned by HM King Charles.

Thank you ~ happy to be corrected.

 

[Susan D]

I think we are all guessing as to who owns what and I think that the royalty are wrong to not publish the wills or some of the wills. For instance, we don't know what has actually been borrowed from King Charles or from Queen Consort Camilla or what is owned by the woman who wears that piece.

 

[Susan D]

Thanks SirGyamfi, I have been baffled as to WHERE some of Diana's iconic pieces are. Something magnificent, like her pearl choker Necklace with the giant sapphire ? The Queen Mother gave her the sapphire as a Wedding Gift.

Diana had other lovely Pearls choker style necklaces that she was fond of. Her sisters did too. Lovely, but hardly iconic. But where are they ? Meghan has worn some dinky butterfly earrings, the gorgeous aquamarine ring, the watch and a diamond tennis bracelet.

I find it curious. Catherine wears the sapphire and diamond earrings of which there are two sets, as well as having worn the stunning emerald And diamond choker.
I'd love to know the story...... What happened to everything else ?

I too would like to know what happened to the Crown Prince Fahd sapphires.

 

[Queen Claude]

I appreciate the broader point about keeping the collection together, and not loosing large parts of the collection to collateral lines. That said, a monarch who holds the ownership of the jewellery can just as easily keep the collection together, without resorting to losing ownership through a trust. George VI and Elizabeth II both achieved that objective.

As regards Queen Mary and the jewellery that passed down to the Kents, Gloucesters and the Harewoods, a lot of it was acquired by Queen Mary with the intent of passing it down. So whilst today seeing the vast Gloucester collection, which may be sold in time, may seem like a big loss to the main BRF collection of antique jewellery, a lot of it was contemporary jewellery acquired by Queen Mary as she liked a lot of jewellery and she knew she had many children to suitably bejewel. Few items passed to cadet branches were truly historic.

Quiet a bit was historic like the cambridge sapphire Parure which was given to the Kent's or the Teck turqiose Parure which is with the Gloucesters
and most notable Queen victoria's sapphires which had been gvien to Princess
And as good it is to keep the collection together it think somethinkg like a string of Pearls or a smaller brooch could have been given to the granddaughters of Elizabeth II.

King George V gifted Queen Victoria's sapphires to his daughter when she got married. Neither Queen Alexandra nor Queen Mary ever wore the tiara publicly, the same may also be true of the other sapphire pieces. Gifting Mary Victoria's sapphires was a rookie mistake in my book, again neither Alexandra nor Mary seem to fancy them.

Going forward, Queen Mary gifted her own acquisitions, jewels gifted to her, or bearing in mind that she herself was born a member of the British royal family, but not the mainline, she gifted jewels from her side of the BRF.

My hope is that Queen Elizabeth purchased jewels and gifted them to her female relatives. I seem to vaguely remember that shortly after she died a royal from another country stated that Elizabeth gifted her jewelry for some milestone occasion. It would be fantastic if we find out that QEII gifted her relatives and/or other royals the same jewel along the lines of the tradition started by Queen Ingrid with the Connaught bracelet.

 

[muriel]

I think we are all guessing as to who owns what and I think that the royalty are wrong to not publish the wills or some of the wills. For instance, we don't know what has actually been borrowed from King Charles or from Queen Consort Camilla or what is owned by the woman who wears that piece.

Yes, we would all like to know every small detail of every piece of jewellery owned by members of the BRF and everything to do with the personal finances of members of the BRF, but why does the King need to reveal any of this to the public? Apart from our own curiosity, I see no real reason to put that information in the public domain.

The Royal Household is very transparent on financing from public finances, but private financing is a different matter, IMO.

 

[LauraS3514]

We need to remember that prior to the mid-2000s, gifts to the royal family, even "official" gifts, were considered personal property of that royal. It was only after Charles and Camilla married that the tabloid press made a big hullabaloo over the Middle Eastern gifts that Camilla received on their first joint tour that the new policy came into effect ie. that those official gifts automatically went to the Royal Collection, with the giftee being allowed to use them for their lifetime. Although the catalyst was the rampant anti-Camilla feelings still in circulation at the time, I believe that the policy would have come about eventually just because of the optics.

 

[tommy100]

It didn't have anything to do with Camilla. Official gifts became a hot topic for the RF in 2002 (Charles and Camilla didn't marry until 2005) when royal aides, including Prince Charles' aide Michael Fawcett, were found to have sold official gifts. It came off the back of the Paul Burrell case.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/nov/12/monarchy.jamiewilson
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...aced-for-report-on-burrell-affair-122093.html

The gift policy can be found here https://www.royal.uk/sites/default/files/media-packs/gifts_policy_2003.pdf
It was released in 2003, first issued in 1995, with updates in 2000 and 2002.

 

[LauraS3514]

It didn't have anything to do with Camilla. Official gifts became a hot topic for the RF in 2002 (Charles and Camilla didn't marry until 2005) when royal aides, including Prince Charles' aide Michael Fawcett, were found to have sold official gifts. It came off the back of the Paul Burrell case.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/nov/12/monarchy.jamiewilson
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...aced-for-report-on-burrell-affair-122093.html

The gift policy can be found here https://www.royal.uk/sites/default/files/media-packs/gifts_policy_2003.pdf
It was released in 2003, first issued in 1995, with updates in 2000 and 2002.

I stand corrected, then. I remembered it differently, but I'm obviously wrong. Mea culpa.

 

[tommy100]

There was of course notable press coverage when Camilla came out wearing that mega ruby necklace, but quite thankfully the press had the info that it would be part of the royal collection by then.

 

[muriel]

The Cambridge sapphires in particular were stunning, it's such a pity that they are now lost to the main line of the royal family.

You are right, the Cambridge sapphires were lovely and a loss to the main line. Queen Mary did a lot to build up the BRF collection of jewellery, but passing those to a cadet branch was a mistake, IMO.

 

[MARG]

I think that HLM gifted her daughters in law and granddaughters in law, small but significant gifts. I find it interesting that a tiara was purchased as a wedding gift for Sarah, and one was created out of elements from the vaults and gifted to Sophie, but she only loaned tiaras to her granddaughters and granddaughters in law. It is almost as if she left the gifting of further jewels to Charles.

However, Charles has displayed an incredibly refined taste in jewellery so we can wait with bated breath for gifts. But loans . . . OMG!!! Charles vault has had the dust and must well and truly swept away and now it is a whole new ball game and there is sparkle as far as the eye can see, Royal Ascot astonishing and the Japanese State visit sublime. So the jewel and tiara guessing just got a giant shot in the arm for the BRF.

 

[Stefan]

I think that HLM gifted her daughters in law and granddaughters in law, small but significant gifts. I find it interesting that a tiara was purchased as a wedding gift for Sarah, and one was created out of elements from the vaults and gifted to Sophie, but she only loaned tiaras to her granddaughters and granddaughters in law. It is almost as if she left the gifting of further jewels to Charles.

Was Sophie's Wedding tiara really a gift. At the Wedding it was said on loan. And given that the elements come from Queen Victoria's regal circlet i would not think that it was gifted.

 

[Tilia C.]

I agree, there is no proof that Sophie was gifted her wedding tiara, and it is not likely that pieces dating back to Queen Victoria would be gifted away.
Also, Sophie has access to the five aquamarine tiara, which probably also was a loan from the Queen. And we don't know who gave her the contemporary aquamarine necklace tiara. So it's not as if the Queen has jewel-starved her.

But it really seems that Charles wants to widen the range of jewels worn by the ladies of the RF. It's a real novelty, that Sophie wore a tiara which has recently been worn by Kate. They seem to incorporate some sharing into their jewel distribution. So, that will open up so many more possibilities, and is a very good move, imo.

 

[An Ard Ri]

One can only imagine what the full collection of personal jewels belonging to the late QEII looked like,there may also have been many pieces which were never worn.

 

[Blog Real]

I imagine that Queen Elizabeth II's jewels, especially the tiaras and other more important jewels, will be in the vaults of Buckingham Palace (?) available to the main members of the family. But I believe that she gave some other jewelry during her lifetime to her closest relatives and would certainly have a will, which stipulates how the jewelry will be divided.

 

[SLV]

But it really seems that Charles wants to widen the range of jewels worn by the ladies of the RF. It's a real novelty, that Sophie wore a tiara which has recently been worn by Kate. They seem to incorporate some sharing into their jewel distribution. So, that will open up so many more possibilities, and is a very good move, imo.

Which tiara did Sophie wear?

 

[An Ard Ri]

Which tiara did Sophie wear?

The Lotus Flower Tiara at the Japanese State Gala last week.

 

[Mbruno]

I agree, there is no proof that Sophie was gifted her wedding tiara, and it is not likely that pieces dating back to Queen Victoria would be gifted away.
Also, Sophie has access to the five aquamarine tiara, which probably also was a loan from the Queen. And we don't know who gave her the contemporary aquamarine necklace tiara. So it's not as if the Queen has jewel-starved her.

But it really seems that Charles wants to widen the range of jewels worn by the ladies of the RF. It's a real novelty, that Sophie wore a tiara which has recently been worn by Kate. They seem to incorporate some sharing into their jewel distribution. So, that will open up so many more possibilities, and is a very good move, imo.

I don't think Sophie wearing the Lotus Flower tiara at the Japanese state dinner has any special meaning because, due to extraordinary circumstances, she was "standing in" for the Princess of Wales as Second Lady of the Court, and was even seated where Kate would have been seated if she had been able to attend.

I will believe in a new "jewel sharing policy" with junior royals if I see Sophie wearing other tiaras when she is back to her normal precedence. I am not ruling out that there might be a new policy. I am just saying that I am not convinced yet that this is the case.

 

[pkl]

Agree. We have to wait and see. It is still early to see a pattern for sure.

 

[Princess B]

I’d like a system like the Swedes have, a foundation for jewels, everyone gets to wear a variety

 

[Toledo]

I doubt the heavy or historical jewels were gifted away. I see the collection as if it was a library owned by the head of the household, now King Charles. He authorizes the collection to be on loan by a working royal family member to properly represent him and the monarchy. But at the end they all go back to the royal vault to be enjoyed by new generations of royal ladies.

What I would like to see is new pieces created with the intent to be gifted to a working royal lady.

 

[tommy100]

I wonder if Sophie's use of the Lotus tiara doesn't also mean that Catherine no longer has need of it, and has new to her tiaras to wear since the accession / coronation.

I do think Charles is probably more generous with jewellery in some ways - we know he likes it and I suspect he is of the opinion that there is no harm in sharing out use of well known pieces that would otherwise be sat in the vault. As they are well known there is no drama from them being seen again and again.

 

[Toledo]

I wonder if Sophie's use of the Lotus tiara doesn't also mean that Catherine no longer has need of it, and has new to her tiaras to wear since the accession / coronation.

I do think Charles is probably more generous with jewellery in some ways - we know he likes it and I suspect he is of the opinion that there is no harm in sharing out use of well known pieces that would otherwise be sat in the vault. As they are well known there is no drama from them being seen again and again.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I recall reading here in RFs that the UK tradition is once you are assigned a tiara no one uses it. I believe it was around the time of Meghan requesting a specific tiara to use that was already assigned to Catherine. Anyone remembers the rules and tiara assignments from that time?

 

[SirGyamfi1]

I doubt the heavy or historical jewels were gifted away. I see the collection as if it was a library owned by the head of the household, now King Charles. He authorizes the collection to be on loan by a working royal family member to properly represent him and the monarchy. But at the end they all go back to the royal vault to be enjoyed by new generations of royal ladies.

What I would like to see is new pieces created with the intent to be gifted to a working royal lady.

New pieces of jewellery will not be made. I highly doubt that will be something he will do.