unfortunately, I do not have this catalogue, nor can I identify this parure.
We should also remember that, unless proved by reliable documents, an attribution to Empress Joséphine (or to any royal or imperial lady) might be disputable - such attributions to Joséphine, or to Marie-Antoinette, were not rare, though not always very serious, because that could help to increase substantially the financial value of a jewel. Bernard Morel, in his book about the French Crown Jewels (Les Joyaux de la Couronne de France, 1988), has dismissed some of these unreliable attributions.
Morel has published in his book a summary of the inventory of Empress Joséphine's jewels at her death in 1814. Among the "only diamond" jewels, Morel mentions:
- "a splendid necklace of 27 big brilliants", whose description clearly does not match with the "40 circular clusters" of the Wavertree auction. Morel adds that Joséphine's necklace was inherited by her daughter Hortense, who later sold it to the Tsar of Russia
- "a diadem of brilliant and briolette diamonds, of which one part was missing". This tiara could have been inherited by Joséphine's son, Eugène, Duke of Leuchtenberg; the stones (and notably the briolettes) could have been the stones later mounted by Eugène's descendants, the Russian Dukes of Leuchtenberg, on a new tiara made by Fabergé circa 1890, and which was later in the possession of Prince Charles of Belgium, Count of Flanders, of his sister Queen Marie-Josée of Italy, and of her daughter Maria-Gabriella of Italy, who sold it in 2007 at Christie's. But I am not sure if this would be coherent with Lord Howard of Glossop buying this necklace in 1933 (it would have supposed him to sell it later to the Count of Flanders or to Queen Elisabeth of the Belgians), so I would not assert that the Wavertree aution tiara is the Fabergé Leuchtenberg tiara.
Of course, the diamond parure auctioned at Sotheby's in 1933 by Lady Wavertree could have belonged to Joséphine, but could have been given by her to one of her children before her death (then, it would have not been mentioned in the Empress' jewel inventory made afer her death in 1814). But then, it gets really difficult to follow the track of the jewels.
Another diamond tiara is frequently attributed to Empress Joséphine. It belongs to the Van Cleef and Arpels collection. It was worn in 1963 by Princess Grace of Monaco at a costume ball in Monte-Carlo, and in 1988 by Princess Isabelle, Countess of Paris, for her grand-daughter Mathilde of Wurttemberg's pre-wedding ball. It was also worn by various models, probably for Van Cleef & Arpels advertisements.
Once again, it is difficult to tell if this tiara was the same as the one sold at the Wavertree auction in 1933. We can notice that in 1933, the tiara, necklace and brooch were forming a single lot, whereas Van Cleef & Arpels owns no necklace and brooch matching their tiara (otherwise they would have certainly displayed them with the tiara). Moreover, Bernard Morel has expressed his doubts about the attribution of the Van Cleef & Arpels tiara to Empress Joséphine: for him, the pointed shape of the tiara does not fit with the style of Napoleonic jewellery, and looks more like the style of the 1830s-1840s jewellery.
Sorry not to be able to be more conclusive! The only reliable information is probably in Sotheby's archives. They certainly have kept a copy of their auction catalogues (though I am not not sure that the auction catalogues of that time were systematically illustrated).
--Previous Message-- : I was doing some royal jewel research and came : across an entry for a "Catalogue of : Valuable Jewellery, Fine Furs, Parasols, : Fans, Etc. the Property of the Lady : Wavertree,... Comprising a Suite in : Diamonds, Said to Have Belonged to the : Empress Josephine..." The auction took : place mid-August 1933 and there were 107 : pieces of jewellery auctioned by Sotheby's. : : Further research revealed an article from : the Queensland Times 18 Aug 1933. : : "Lady Wavertree's notable collection of : jewels blazed to some purpose at : Sotheby's...When the moment approached for : the sale of the set piece a suite in : diamonds--tiara, brooch and necklet, : composed of 40 circular clusters, the : atmosphere, says the "Daily : Express", became tense. This set is : traditionally supposed to have belonged to : the Empress Josephine, and is so magnificent : that the crowds gasped in admiration when it : was produced on its bed of red velvet. Bids : tumbled over one another. Quickly they : climbed from £100 until, after a fierce : battle, it fell to Captain John Christie, a : well-known private collector of jewels, for : £910. . . . One after another the 107 pieces : of Lady Wavertree's collection fell under : the auctioneer's hammer, until a specimen : black pearl ring was shown. This was the : centre of a little drama between Lord Howard : of Glossop and one of the biggest dealers In : London. Both wanted the pearl badly. Both : knew that it is only on rare occasions : specimen black pearls are ever on the : market. The price shot up, but Lord Howard : finally outbid the dealer by paying £250 for : it." : : Does anyone have access to the catalogue : which most likely has a picture of the : suite? : : Lady Wavertree, C.B.E., Dame of St. John was : the former Sophie Florence Lothrop (née : Sheridan), Lady Wavertree (later Fisher) : (died 1952), Matron of Sussex Lodge : Hospital; former wife of 1st Baron Wavertree : of Delamere, who presented the National Stud : to Great Britain and wife of Francis M. B. : Fisher (a former New Zealand Cabinet : Minister); daughter of Algernon Thomas : Brinsley Sheridan, She was the : great-great-grand daughter of Richard : Brinsley Sheridan, famous playwright and : orator, and the grand-daughter of John : Lothrop Motley, a former United States : Ambassador to England, and author of : "The Dutch Republic." : : Laura : :
on October 7, 2014, 5:16 am, in reply to "
