Posted by Nellie on October 12, 2015, 5:41 am, in reply to "Re: 1888 or 1858"
Beth - I'm so glad you found this addition down in this thread.
Yes, those Royal Collection links are in the correct sequence and their notes do vary.
This sent me to my copy of Victoria & Albert: Art & Love
By that publication - 1. The large elements are the arches and the thin tall ones are the spires. 2. The Oriental was created two years after the gift of the Indian jewels from the Treasury of Lahore. 3. "Originally the arches and 'spires' were removable to be replaced by large single diamonds..." 4. "More than 2,600 diamonds were used, of which slightly under half were provided by the Queen." 5. "In 1858, following the settlement of the claim to certain of Queen Victoria's jewels in favour of Hanover, the tiara had to be partly remade in order to return the diamonds that had been taken from Queen Charlotte's stomacher, now deemed to belong to the King of Hanover by the terms of Queen Charlotte's will." 6. "The final change came in 1901 when the tiara was remade by Garrards for Queen Alexandra and reduced in size,..." 7. "At the same time the opals were replaced with eleven rubies from a necklace..."
They name Bury as their source. Bury has been my source for the Hanoverian claim story, and the Oriental.
I could remark on Boffer's opening to that thread linked, but I think it is best to read the thread, and all remarks there.