What we know for sure (and provided, of course, that the tiara in question is the one I have mentionned in my previous message): - 1845-1893: the emerald tiara is owned by Queen Victoria - 1893: the tiara is given to Princess Louise, Marchioness of Lorne (later Duchess of Argyll) - 1939: Princess Louise, Duchess of Argyll, dies without children - which implies that she probably bequeathed most of her belongings to relatives - 1960: the tiara is worn by the then Duchess of Fife for the State Opening of Parliament - 2001: pictures of the tiara are published in Geoffrey Munn's book Tiaras, A History of Splendour.
Now, the hypothesis: as Princess Louise, Duchess of Argyll, died childless, she might have bequathed the emerald tiara (and the matching necklace and brooch) not to Princess Louise, Duchess of Fife (who had died in 1931), but to the latter's daughter, Maud Duff, Countess of Southesk (mother of the current Duke of Fife). Or she could even have presented the parure to the Duchess of Fife before her death. Maybe Princess Louise, Duchess of Argyll, had a special affection to her niece and namesake Princess Louise, Duchess of Fife, as they had the same first name and had both married a Scottish aristocrat, which could have convinced Louise "Sr." to give the emerald parure to Louise "Jr." (or to her children). But so far, it is just speculation...
--Previous Message-- : This is interesting!!!! : : The inventory (dated 1896) says it was given : to "Princess Louise, Marchioness of : Lorne, June 19, 1893." : : So, it did go to "Louise Sr.". : : The question now becomes, when did it go to : "Louise Jr." ? Presumably, Louise : Sr. could have been willed to her namesake, : Louise Jr. Louise Sr died in 1939. Was : the tiara ever seen worn by Louise Jr. prior : to that date? : : Another interesting question is: why was it : given to Louise at that date? And, why : in addition to the one given her as a : wedding present? :
on July 10, 2014, 5:20 pm, in reply to "