In her tenure as Queen Consort, Fabiola had many grand occasions where a sapphire, diamond, and NATURAL pearl necklace would have been welcome. Instead, she stuck to her small collection of diamonds and aquamarines. I think she never owned this either, only borrowed.
She wore it in 1992 and her mother passed away in the early 1980's. So she either inherited it from her mother or loaned it from one of her siblings.
Are we even sure Fabiola owned this necklace? If her mother wore it for her wedding and the Queen only was seen with it once it could just as well have been a family piece she loaned from her mother and was inherited by another sibling.
It did not figure in the book on Belgian Royal jewels either and it's author is well informed. So im more inclined to call this a necklace Fabiola wore rather than owned.
Even if she owned it, a piece she would have inherited from her mother going to her own side of the family seems completely right. That one or more of her nieces and nephews prefer the money over a jewel is not that uncommon.
That is sad
It would have been a welcoming piece to the Belgian royal collection.
Yesterday in Paris a natural pearl, sappphire and diamonds necklace once belonguing to queen Fabiola was sold in auction by Sotheby's. The question is who sold it ?
https://netherlands.postsen.com/live-style/155769/Very-expensive-necklace-by-Fabiola-auctioned-at-Sotheby%E2%80%99s-why-the-jewel-is-not-around-Mathilde%E2%80%99s-neck--royalty.html
742