After detailed research into the subject, through both primary and secondary sources, I believe I have now established the full chronology of the various diamonds and circlets in the Royal Collection from the time of Queen Charlotte to The Queen.
Queen Charlotte had a tripartite stomacher made during the early years of her marriage, using stones that had been in the collection of Queen Caroline, including the large Cumberland Diamond; all of these stones would later be included in the Hanoverian Claim.
Queen Adelaide had the stones from removed from Queen Charlotte’s stomacher in 1830, and these were temporarily set into her Coronation Crown. Following the coronation, her crown was dismantled, and some of the diamonds were reset into the smallest section of ‘Queen Charlotte’s Stomacher’ – the other two larger sections of the stomacher were never reset, as the diamonds (including the large Cumberland Diamond) were set into ‘Queen Adelaide’s Circlet’.
In 1837, Queen Victoria inherited both the Diamond Diadem (that George IV had made in 1820) and also ‘Queen Adelaide’s Circlet’, as well as the smallest part of ‘Queen Charlotte’s Stomacher’.
In 1852, ‘Queen Adelaide’s Circlet’ was dismantled, and the stones were used to create ‘Queen Victoria’s Regal Circlet’, this work was carried out as it was deemed easier to create a wholly new circlet than to try and remodel ‘Queen Adelaide’s Circlet’ to hold the Koh-i-Nor diamond. This new regal circlet also contained the Cumberland Diamond set in the front of the band.
The remaining part of Queen Charlotte’s Stomacher was also dismantled by Queen Victoria, with the diamonds being incorporated into the new ‘Queen Victoria’s Oriental Circlet’ that was commissioned. This tiara was originally a whole circlet.
In 1858, as many of the diamonds in these two circlets were taken from ‘Queen Charlotte’s Stomacher’, they thus underwent alterations as part of the Hanoverian Claim.
‘Queen Victoria’s Regal Circlet’ was dismantled and the stones were returned to Hanover, including the Cumberland Diamonds. These stones were replaced by stones from the Queen’s collection and also stones furnished by Garrard. The cost of the refurbishment of this circlet does not appear in the Garrard Royal Ledgers, as the cost was met by the Paymaster General, not the Royal Household. It is of note that the large Cumberland Diamond was replaced with a similarly large stone that had been gifted to Queen Victoria by the Sultan of Turkey (it was included in the same gift as the diamonds included in ‘Queen Victoria’s Fringe Brooch’ – as recorded in Roberts).
Due the Hanoverian Claim, part of the ‘Queen Victoria’s Oriental Circlet’ had to be dismantled to removed the stones that had come from ‘Queen Charlotte’s Stomacher’. It was thus at this time that the tiara was altered, as rather than recreating the whole piece with new stones, it was decided to alter the back of the piece, meaning that it was no longer a whole circlet.
Thus ‘The Diamond Diadem’, ‘Queen Victoria’s Regal Circlet’ and ‘Queen Victoria’s Oriental Circlet’ passed to Queen Alexandra in 1901. Queen Alexandra subsequently altered the oriental circlet to include rubies instead of opals.
In 1910 when all three pieces passed to Queen Mary, Queen Alexandra commissioned her own Circlet; ‘Queen Alexandra’s Circlet’ included the Cullinan VII stone. This circlet later passed to Queen Maud of Norway (without the Cullinan VII stone, which passed to Queen Mary, both in 1925).
In 1911, Queen Mary first wore ‘Queen Victoria’s Regal Circlet’ to the first state opening of parliament of the new reign, therein after, she wore her own circlet.
In 1936, all three pieces again passed to Queen Elizabeth, then the decision was taken to dismantle ‘Queen Victoria’s Regal Circlet’ and the stones were used to furnish Queen Elizabeth’s new crown; which could also be dismantled to be worn as a circlet.
Thus today, the Royal Collection includes 'The Diamond Diadem', 'Queen Victoria's Regal Circlet', the circlet from 'Queen Mary's Crown' and the circlet from 'Queen Elizabeth's Crown', the latter two of which are kept in the Jewel House of the Tower of London.
I am in the process of creating very detailed and referenced notes on all the above mentioned pieces. Yet I thought I would share with you my overview of the ‘story of the stones and pieces’. To help clarify previous discussions and affirm my own conclusions based on those discussions and my subsequent research.
Re: British Circlets
Posted by jinja on June 28, 2012, 8:53 pm, in reply to "British Circlets" 76.230.149.253
Thank you, Boffer! Your research really clarifies the history of the various circlets. I do appreciate your continuing work on the diamond jewels in the Queen's collection.
One question. In your final list of circlets available to the Queen, you list Queen Mary's and Queen Elizabeth's circlets. By these, do you mean the crowns without the arches? Since they were consort crowns, and the Queen uses the George IV diadem for official occasions, she has never worn those circlets, but I understand that they are private property. Displayed, of course, with the Crown Jewels in the Tower.
Is the setting for Queen Charlotte's three part stomacher still in existence? It would be interesting to know how similar it was to the later stomachers which also were designed in three parts.
jinja
Re: British Circlets
Posted by Nellie on June 28, 2012, 11:37 pm, in reply to "Re: British Circlets" 124.170.57.61
Thank you Boffer for sharing your work at this point.
I nodded as I read it but had questions at various points. The following remarks are just from off the top of my head.
1853 Garrard ledger page, for the QV RC, shows that it was to be in a variety of forms. Alternate sets of elements.
I thought the largest Cumberland was replaced by a cluster.
At least the Oriental and QVRC were left by Queen Victoria to the Crown (Twining).
If you identify the two latest crowns of queen consorts as circlets I think that is wrong to do. Unnecesary and highly likely to confuse people. Perhaps I have misunderstood what you have written. But I think it is inconceivable that the Queen would ever consider, for one moment, wearing either of those crowns, without their arches.
And I am interested to learn your sources, in due course. I don't always agree totally with conclusions you draw. And do you have the work by Judy Rudoe on Queen Charlotte's jewels? I might have to read it again.
Re: Queen Mary's Crown
Posted by Nellie on June 28, 2012, 11:59 pm, in reply to "Re: British Circlets" 124.170.57.61
I have read that Queen Mary gave her crown to George V for use by future queen consorts, so it is no longer private property.
--part of Previous Message-- : : One question. In your final list of circlets : available to the Queen, you list Queen : Mary's and Queen Elizabeth's circlets. By : these, do you mean the crowns without the : arches? Since they were consort crowns, and : the Queen uses the George IV diadem for : official occasions, she has never worn those : circlets, but I understand that they are : private property. Displayed, of course, : with the Crown Jewels in the Tower. :
Re: QV Regal Circlet
Posted by Nellie on June 29, 2012, 12:37 am, in reply to "Re: British Circlets" 124.170.57.61
Thought I'd post the Garrard ledger page for Queen Victoria's Regal Circlet and my transcription of it.
Re: British Circlets
Posted by Boffer on June 29, 2012, 4:38 am, in reply to "Re: British Circlets" 109.158.33.207
Nellie,
Yes, 'Queen Victoria's Regal Circlet' also contained a varied number of interchangeable elements such as cross-pattees, fleur-de-lys, and honeysuckle. My point was that it was made up using diamonds that were taken from Queen Adelaide's dismantled circlet, which had in turn contained diamonds taken from Queen Charlotte's stomacher. And that a new circlet was made in order to include the Koh-i-Nur diamond.
Th Cumberland Diamond was replaced by the large stone, that was amongst the gift of many diamonds from the Sultan of Turkey following the Crimean War. Although this diamond is still set in a cluster, it is still a notably large stone - which is constantly pointed out in the various scholarship.
Yes, all three of the large pieces, 'The Diamond Diadem', 'Queen Victoria's Regal Circlet' and 'Queen Victoria's Oriental Circlet' were designated as heirlooms of the Crown by Queen Victoria in 1901. That is why I noted how they passed between Queens in 1910 and 1936.
I merely included the Crown circlet of Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth to identify that they did wear them as circlets frequently. This was to clarify to people that if they have seen images of Queen Mary or Queen Elizabeth wearing a circlet, then it is likely to be their own and not Queen Victoria's Regal Circlet or another piece.
As for the list of the circlet owned by the current Queen, and the inclusion of Queen Mary's and Queen Elizabeth's; I included these to show all the circlets that are at the use of The Queen, and future royal women, although I agree it is unlikely that The Queen would ever wear these pieces, she is in full right to do so, just as she is in full right to wear 'Queen Victoria's Small Diamond Crown' as they are all her property. Despite being housed in the Jewel House of the Tower of London, all the aforementioned crowns and their circlets are part of the Royal Collection thus at The Queen's disposal to wear.
I used a whole host of sources, nearly everything that has been written including:
Roberts, Bury (Both her article on the hanoverian claim for the World Jewellery Fair Handbook, and the Appendix of Jewellery), Rudoe's article of Queen Charlotte's Jewels, Garrard - history of the crown jewellers - Munn - Field and Menkes - The Times and other contemporary periodicals - and more, however I do not have access right now to my bibliography to check.
--Previous Message-- : : Thank you Boffer for sharing your work at : this point. : : I nodded as I read it but had questions at : various points. The following remarks are : just from off the top of my head. : : 1853 Garrard ledger page, for the QV RC, : shows that it was to be in a variety of : forms. Alternate sets of elements. : : I thought the largest Cumberland was : replaced by a cluster. : : At least the Oriental and QVRC were left by : Queen Victoria to the Crown (Twining). : : If you identify the two latest crowns of : queen consorts as circlets I think that is : wrong to do. : Unnecesary and highly likely to confuse : people. Perhaps I have misunderstood what : you have written. : But I think it is inconceivable that the : Queen would ever consider, for one moment, : wearing either of those crowns, without : their arches. : : And I am interested to learn your sources, : in due course. I don't always agree totally : with conclusions you draw. : And do you have the work by Judy Rudoe on : Queen Charlotte's jewels? I might have to : read it again. : : : : :
Thanks for your explanation but I do not think everyone will read your notes the way you intended. Edit: That is not quite what I mean to convey. I think you are stretching traditional meanings for jewels. I don't feel that is beneficial from a research point of view. it is an extremely personal [i]interpretation[/i] that you use. i hope that is clearer?
--Previous Message-- : Nellie, : : Yes, 'Queen Victoria's Regal Circlet' also : contained a varied number of interchangeable : elements such as cross-pattees, : fleur-de-lys, and honeysuckle. : My point was that it was made up using : diamonds that were taken from Queen : Adelaide's dismantled circlet, which had in : turn contained diamonds taken from Queen : Charlotte's stomacher. And that a new : circlet was made in order to include the : Koh-i-Nur diamond. : : Th Cumberland Diamond was replaced by the : large stone, that was amongst the gift of : many diamonds from the Sultan of Turkey : following the Crimean War. Although this : diamond is still set in a cluster, it is : still a notably large stone - which is : constantly pointed out in the various : scholarship. : : Yes, all three of the large pieces, 'The : Diamond Diadem', 'Queen Victoria's Regal : Circlet' and 'Queen Victoria's Oriental : Circlet' were designated as heirlooms of the : Crown by Queen Victoria in 1901. That is why : I noted how they passed between Queens in : 1910 and 1936. : : I merely included the Crown circlet of Queen : Mary and Queen Elizabeth to identify that : they did wear them as circlets frequently. : This was to clarify to people that if they : have seen images of Queen Mary or Queen : Elizabeth wearing a circlet, then it is : likely to be their own and not Queen : Victoria's Regal Circlet or another piece. : : As for the list of the circlet owned by the : current Queen, and the inclusion of Queen : Mary's and Queen Elizabeth's; I included : these to show all the circlets that are at : the use of The Queen, and future royal : women, although I agree it is unlikely that : The Queen would ever wear these pieces, she : is in full right to do so, just as she is in : full right to wear 'Queen Victoria's Small : Diamond Crown' as they are all her property. : Despite being housed in the Jewel House of : the Tower of London, all the aforementioned : crowns and their circlets are part of the : Royal Collection thus at The Queen's : disposal to wear. : : I used a whole host of sources, nearly : everything that has been written including: : : Roberts, Bury (Both her article on the : hanoverian claim for the World Jewellery : Fair Handbook, and the Appendix of : Jewellery), Rudoe's article of Queen : Charlotte's Jewels, Garrard - history of the : crown jewellers - Munn - Field and Menkes - : The Times and other contemporary periodicals : - and more, however I do not have access : right now to my bibliography to check.
Is the large Turkish diamond now set in the Queen Mother's crown along with the other diamonds from Queen Victoria's circlet?
Since the Victoria circlet was designated by Queen Victoria for the use of future queens, should it have been dismantled to create the QEQM crown? jinja
Re: British Circlets
Posted by Boffer on June 29, 2012, 8:06 am, in reply to "Re: British Circlets" 109.158.33.207
Yes, the diamond from the Sultan Turkey is now set in the front of the band of Queen Elizabeth's Circlet.
My understanding of the will of Queen Victoria is that although they were designated as heirlooms of the Crown, there was no rule stipulating that they couldn't be altered. After all Queen Victoria herself altered many of the jewels that she inherited from Queen Adelaide.
--Previous Message-- : A couple of other questions: : : Is the large Turkish diamond now set in the : Queen Mother's crown along with the other : diamonds from Queen Victoria's circlet? : : Since the Victoria circlet was designated by : Queen Victoria for the use of future queens, : should it have been dismantled to create the : QEQM crown? : :
Re: British Circlets - Crown?
Posted by Nellie on June 29, 2012, 8:43 am, in reply to "Re: British Circlets" 124.170.57.61
Boffer - I do wish you would call it Queen Elizabeth's Crown. Or perhaps you are aware of some renaming that is yet to be disclosed?????
--Previous Message-- : Yes, the diamond from the Sultan Turkey is now : set in the front of the band of Queen : Elizabeth's Circlet. : : My understanding of the will of Queen : Victoria is that although they were : designated as heirlooms of the Crown, there : was no rule stipulating that they couldn't : be altered. After all Queen Victoria herself : altered many of the jewels that she : inherited from Queen Adelaide. : : --Previous Message-- : A couple of other questions: : : Is the large Turkish diamond now set in the : Queen Mother's crown along with the other : diamonds from Queen Victoria's circlet? : : Since the Victoria circlet was designated by : Queen Victoria for the use of future queens, : should it have been dismantled to create the : QEQM crown? : : : :
Re: QV Regal Circlet & Cumberland
Posted by Nellie on June 29, 2012, 9:33 am, in reply to "Re: QV Regal Circlet" 124.170.57.61
I have checked a little more about the major Cumberland diamond.
For Queen Victoria's Regal Circlet I had always thought the Cumberland had its own setting, as an alternate element, to sit above the band, and not on the band.
My view seems supported by Crown Jewels 1998.
It states for Queen Elizabeth's Crown that the diamond of the Sultan of Turkey that is in the central position on the front of the band of that crown was in the same position on Queen Victoria's Regal Circlet, which was stripped of its diamonds to make Queen Elizabeth's Crown.
--Previous Message-- : : : Thought I'd post the Garrard ledger page for : Queen Victoria's Regal Circlet and my : transcription of it.
Re: British Circlets
Posted by jinja on June 29, 2012, 10:26 am, in reply to "Re: British Circlets" 76.230.149.253
The only piece I remember with a stipulation about not altering it is Queen Alexandra's necklace from her father. I expect it might be worn more if it could be adapted.
Interesting to note that the two Turkish gift diamonds are now set in the circlet of the QEQM crown and in the waterfall brooch.
I think you might clarify your descriptions, Boffer, if you referred to the 'circlet of Queen Mary's crown' and the 'circlet of Queen Elizabeth's crown.' We shouldn't give the impression to various readers, some of whom are not educated about royal jewels, that there are more circlets than there actually are.
jinja
To the best of my knowledge the Cumberland Diamond was set in the front of the band of the 'Queen Victoria's Regal Circlet', it was only replaced by the large diamond from the Sultan of Turkey in 1858, when the Cumberland Diamond was returned to Hanover.
Thus the diamond from the Sultan of Turkey was in the centre of the band from 1858 to 1937; this diamond was not originally set in the band of the circlet as it was given to Queen Victoria until 1856, thus it could not have been set in the original circlet which was made in 1853.
What's more, Bury reveals that all the diamonds from the band of the circlet were removed and handed over to Hanover, being replaced by diamonds provided by Garrard, all except the large central diamond from Turkey.
It is Roberts himself on page 48 who states that this large diamond from the Sultan of Turkey "was used to replace the Cumberland Diamond in the Regal Circlet, which was reset in 1858". Which is what has led me to my conclusion that the Cumberland Diamond was set in the centre of the band of the regal circlet, and was replaced by the Turkish diamond in 1858. This turkish diamond still occupies the same position in the centre of the band of Queen Elizabeth's Crown (I will use this term from now, apologies for any confusion it may have caused).
In terms of the Garrard Royal Ledger that mentions that the Cumberland Diamond was set into the centre of a cluster, of large diamonds surrounded by small roses. This to me, indicates that the Cumberland Diamond could be worn in this cluster in the centre of the large Honeysuckle Brooch (in place of the Koh-i-Nor). Yet when not being worn in this cluster and brooch, it was worn in the centre of the band of the circlet.
--Previous Message-- : : I have checked a little more about the major : Cumberland diamond. : : For Queen Victoria's Regal Circlet I had : always thought the Cumberland had its own : setting, as an alternate element, to sit : above the band, and not on the band. : : My view seems supported by Crown Jewels : 1998. : : It states for Queen Elizabeth's Crown that : the diamond of the Sultan of Turkey that is : in the central position on the front of the : band of that crown was in the same position : on Queen Victoria's Regal Circlet, which was : stripped of its diamonds to make Queen : Elizabeth's Crown. : : : --Previous Message-- : : : Thought I'd post the Garrard ledger page for : Queen Victoria's Regal Circlet and my : transcription of it. : :
Re: British Circlets
Posted by Boffer on June 29, 2012, 10:53 am, in reply to "Re: British Circlets" 109.158.33.207
There were many more Diamonds given by the Sultan of Turkey in 1856. In fact two jewels were given; the first of which was reset almost immediately with the diamonds being included in the Chain de Corsage that Queen Victoria had made in 1856.
The corsage was later altered with many of the diamonds being removed to create 'Queen Victoria's Small Crown', with only the central cluster and fringe pampilles suspended from this, used to create 'Queen Victoria's Fringe Brooch'.
The second jewel given was a stomacher, which contained the large diamond that was later set in the Regal Circlet. This stomacher was not reset until 1858, and it is unclear how the rest of these stones were used (other than the large diamond), although it is likely that they were used to remake the various pieces that has been handed over in the Hanoverian Claim.
As it seemed to cause a lot of confusion with my inclusion of Queen Mary's and Queen Elizabeth's Crowns (the main reason I included these references was to indicate what had happened to the diamonds from the regal circlet and where they are now). I have thus edited my original post to include: "Thus today, the Royal Collection includes 'The Diamond Diadem', 'Queen Victoria's Regal Circlet', the circlet from 'Queen Mary's Crown' and the circlet from 'Queen Elizabeth's Crown', the latter two of which are kept in the Jewel House of the Tower of London and have never been worn by the present Queen."
--Previous Message-- : The only piece I remember with a stipulation : about not altering it is Queen Alexandra's : necklace from her father. I expect it might : be worn more if it could be adapted. : : Interesting to note that the two Turkish : gift diamonds are now set in the circlet of : the QEQM crown and in the waterfall brooch. : : I think you might clarify your descriptions, : Boffer, if you referred to the 'circlet of : Queen Mary's crown' and the 'circlet of : Queen Elizabeth's crown.' We shouldn't give : the impression to various readers, some of : whom are not educated about royal jewels, : that there are more circlets than there : actually are. :
Re: British Circlets
Posted by jinja on June 29, 2012, 12:17 pm, in reply to "Re: British Circlets" 76.230.149.253
Thanks for editing your references to the circlets of the consort crowns, Boffer. That's much more clear, and since publications seem to pick up information from this Board, it's good to be precise.
I also appreciate your description of the Turkish diamonds. They must have been a welcome gift for Queen Victoria, as she had to send so many of Queen Charlotte's diamonds to Hanover.
jinja
Thanks Boffer. The Cumberland was in in 1853 and the Turkish not until 1858. However, your third para, from Bury, does not fit with this.
It is never surpriing to find respected authors differ in places.
I'll read Roberts again at some point and am happy to leave the issue now.
I just found that your highly concise notes blurred what I think might be from evidence and what is from your assumptions or interpretation. Brevity is not always advisable.
--Previous Message-- : To the best of my knowledge the Cumberland : Diamond was set in the front of the band of : the 'Queen Victoria's Regal Circlet', it was : only replaced by the large diamond from the : Sultan of Turkey in 1858, when the : Cumberland Diamond was returned to Hanover. : : Thus the diamond from the Sultan of Turkey : was in the centre of the band from 1858 to : 1937; this diamond was not originally set in : the band of the circlet as it was given to : Queen Victoria until 1856, thus it could not : have been set in the original circlet which : was made in 1853. : : What's more, Bury reveals that all the : diamonds from the band of the circlet were : removed and handed over to Hanover, being : replaced by diamonds provided by Garrard, : all except the large central diamond from : Turkey. : : It is Roberts himself on page 48 who states : that this large diamond from the Sultan of : Turkey "was used to replace the : Cumberland Diamond in the Regal Circlet, : which was reset in 1858". Which is what : has led me to my conclusion that the : Cumberland Diamond was set in the centre of : the band of the regal circlet, and was : replaced by the Turkish diamond in 1858. : This turkish diamond still occupies the same : position in the centre of the band of Queen : Elizabeth's Crown (I will use this term from : now, apologies for any confusion it may have : caused). : : In terms of the Garrard Royal Ledger that : mentions that the Cumberland Diamond was set : into the centre of a cluster, of large : diamonds surrounded by small roses. This to : me, indicates that the Cumberland Diamond : could be worn in this cluster in the centre : of the large Honeysuckle Brooch (in place of : the Koh-i-Nor). Yet when not being worn in : this cluster and brooch, it was worn in the : centre of the band of the circlet. :
Re: British Circlets & Crowns
Posted by Nellie on June 29, 2012, 8:09 pm, in reply to "Re: British Circlets" 124.170.57.61
Thanks again Boffer for your response.
However, I just want to record that I'm not yet fully satisfied with the added sentence - as a permanent record in the archives of this board.
Queen Victoria's Regal Circlet is an empty frame only; and the other two are crowns - fully fledged crowns except for certain crystal replica gems. I don't support downgrading them to circlets only.
I'll leave this issue here too - unless something really controversial turns up.
--Previous Message-- : Thanks for editing your references to the : circlets of the consort crowns, Boffer. : That's much more clear, and since : publications seem to pick up information : from this Board, it's good to be precise. : : I also appreciate your description of the : Turkish diamonds. They must have been a : welcome gift for Queen Victoria, as she had : to send so many of Queen Charlotte's : diamonds to Hanover. :
Since the circlets of these two crowns were worn at coronations and openings of parliament without the arches, and since the QEQM crown contains diamonds from the Victoria circlet, I do think there should be an accurate description of these two circlets. Boffer's edited version is much better. The complete crowns, with arches, are of course displayed with the crown jewels at the Tower.
It might be worth noting that the alternate elements from Queen Victoria's circlet are now mounted on the Countess of Wessex wedding tiara. The Queen Maud circlet also survives, though worn without the fleur de lys motifs.
Edit: Boffer, is there any indication whether the Queen Adelaide circlet survives, even as an empty frame?
That is the frame of the crown of Queen Adelaide which was dismantled almost immediately after the coronation in 1830, after which Queen Adelaide's Circlet was made.
I have only ever seen one depiction of Queen Adelaide's circlet, being worn by Queen Victoria in a tiny miniature, however this has since been removed from the Royal Collection site.
As far as I am aware the empty frame of this circlet no longer exists, I have never seen any images of it or read of any mention to it. After the circlet was dismantled in 1853, it seems to have been disposed of.
Yes, I have seen Queen Adelaide's crown. The frame is very pretty because it is all gold. I was wondering about the circlet. Thanks for the reply, Boffer.
jinja
This is what I have on the crown of Queen Adelaide, from 2 sources, and The Crown Jewels 1998 says - “Victoria herself wore Queen Adelaide’s Grand or Regal Diadem in processing to her Coronation, as her self-portrait reveals. Sitwell noted in the 1860s the Diadem was popularly known as Anne Boleyn’s Crown, ....”
It seems Queen Adelaide went to her coronation bare headed and all queen consorts have done the same since.
Edit: I never felt the Garrard ledger was clear over whether the circlet frame was used for Victoria's.
Burry's article on the Hanoverian claim
Posted by Bob on July 3, 2012, 4:56 pm, in reply to "British Circlets" 99.231.152.157
I have done extensive "Googling" to find the document, but can't seem to find it, its text, or a second-hand bookseller that has it. Does it exist anywhere on the Internet? It would be a fascinating read.
I think Shirley Bury wrote an article in a journal and that is why you cannot find it. She then included her work as an Appendix in Vol 2 of Jewellery, The International Era 1789-1910. I suggest a library for that?
--Previous Message-- : I have done extensive "Googling" to : find the document, but can't seem to find : it, its text, or a second-hand bookseller : that has it. Does it exist anywhere on the : Internet? It would be a fascinating read. :
Bury wrote the article in the International Jewellery Fair and Seminar Handbook in the 1980s, I myself was not able to find a copy of it, however the Royal Library very kindly scanned the article as a PDF for me when requested.
I can email over this PDF for you, if you would like to read it?
--Previous Message-- : I have done extensive "Googling" to : find the document, but can't seem to find : it, its text, or a second-hand bookseller : that has it. Does it exist anywhere on the : Internet? It would be a fascinating read. :
