Posted by Nellie on July 19, 2014, 2:53 am, in reply to "A possibility?"
I agree that "heirloom of the crown" does not define who may or may not wear the item, but that the decision rests wih the monarch.
--Previous Message-- : I feel that we cannot entirely dismiss what : Roberts says as he was in a position to : obtain accurate information. I think it is : feasible that King George had the necklace : made with the intention that it was to be : given to Princess Elizabeth when she : ascended the throne but in the interim it : was worn by his wife, Queen Elizabeth. The : fact that it was shortened by QEII suggests : that the longer length necklace was made to : fit her mother. We know that QEQM had Queen : Alexandra's pearl necklace lengthened so she : could wear it to advantage. : I think we can also get confused by the term : heirlooms of the crown. The fact that : something is an heirloom of the crown - or : to phrase it another way for our purposes - : jewels belonging to the crown -- does not : necessarily mean that only a queen (consort : or regnant) can wear the item. In my opinion : the term denotes ownership - not who can or : cannot wear an item. We know that the King : gave Princess Elizabeth the Crown Pearls as : a wedding present and that QEQM continued to : wear the Oriental circle tiara, which Queen : Victoria left to the crown and the Crown : 'rubies'. : :
on July 19, 2014, 2:53 am, in reply to "