The secret of Empress Josephine's pearl necklace

[CLICLASP]

And his is how the necklace was on display (you can see the Leman/Geneva lake by the window)
On the left is a painted picture of Queen Josephine wearing her necklace holding her children by the hand.
On the left, this is her mother, we will talk about her later … stay tuned ...

 

[Lady_Disdain]

Anna, I am curious about the length of the two strands. Looking at the images arranged in historical sequence, the lengths seem to vary a lot.

Princess Augusta
View attachment Outlook (7)

Queen Josephine - 5 pearls between each drop (which seems consistent in other paintings of the necklace). Since this is a painting, I just looked at the number of pearls, not their individual shapes.


Ebba Bernadotte - clearly restrung: short choker length but with 6 pearls between each drop. Note the curious button shaped pear near the center drop. All the pearls seem slightly distorted in this image but there is one that is visibly narrower than the others.
View attachment Outlook (6)

Countess Gertie Bernadotte - Back to a princess length with both strands of a similar length, with six pearls between the drops. The curious shaped pearl seems to be in the same place, two to the left of the center drop


Christie's Catalog (1995) -here, we see the outer strand as much longer than the inner strand, still at choker length. The spacing of the drops is still 6 pearls (so extra pearls would have been added at the back, perhaps? Where did those hypothetical pearls come from?) and the funny shaped pearl from the previous photos isn't anywhere to be found.


Model (2014) - by now, it is clear that this configuration is neither the early to mid 20th century nor the historical configuration. In my opinion, a much less graceful arrangement. No funny pearl here either.


Do you know why this layout was chosen? Is the total length of the necklace consistent or were pearls added or removed over the years? Of course the necklace would have been restrung over the centuries but how do these changes affect price and provenance?

 

[CLICLASP]

That's the point, but you are cutting the grass under the feet, wait ...

 

[Lady_Disdain]

Ooops, I am sorry. I didn't meant to spoil you. You are so knowledgeable about these pieces so I wanted to satisfy my curiosity.

Let the show go on! No delicious scones here, so a plebeian home made cinnamon roll will do.

 

[pattye]

Beatriz, I thought the different length of the two strands was curious also, and I counted pearls between the drops, too!

 

[CLICLASP]

The Queen Josephine of Sweden got the necklace from her mother Princess Augusta Amalia de Bavaria, but I suspect the painters for having arranged the way the necklace drapes the neck, anyway the necklace have the same display. in both portraits
I asked a lady in charge with the sale about the story of the necklace, but she did not venture to say more than Sotheby's states.

 

[Marianne]

Loving this story!

 

[CLICLASP]

As I was discussing with the lady about the first time the necklace appeared, we were both saying that the first display was far much interesting, well just a matter of taste, and that sometimes it's crazy to change just for changing, well, coffee shop talking
but look at the necklace on Empress Josephine (not Queen Josephine), first french Empress, Napoleon's wife, one can see the pearls are set on the first shorter strand and the second one has a very round shape. All beaders know that this is possible only with a very stiff thread … Ah ! painters ! cheating is !

Empress Josephine was the mother-in-law of second holder of the necklace, Princess Augusta Amalia de Bavaria.

to be continued …

(BTW I live one street away from Isabey'street, who portrayed Empress Josephine)

 

[CLICLASP]

Some pictures of the necklace in the window where it was exhibited ...

 

[lisa c]

The drops are detachable, so can adorn any necklace, earring, headpiece...I wonder how they keep the hook from poking into the chest?

 

[CLICLASP]

That's right, they are detachable with a kind of finding earrings have

 

[CLICLASP]

There might be the same drop pearls that appeared on this Empress Josephine's portrait (by Fran?ois Simon G?rard Baron) , with her emerald necklace

 

[CLICLASP]

The drops are detachable, so can adorn any necklace, earring, headpiece...I wonder how they keep the hook from poking into the chest?

IMO, this type jewelry was not to for everyday wear, but for special occasion, so do adornments and dresses that weighted 20 kilos and more on coronation days (but not only).
But, for being portrayed the necklaces were put on display on the chest differently as it really drops when worn.
See how "round" it looks like ...

 

[CLICLASP]

This is the photo of the model wearing the necklace that I shot at the moment of auction.
See how the necklace drapes the chest when worn, so different as on the portraits.

 

[CLICLASP]

Now, with these drops that can be worn either as earrings or as aigrette or on any strand on any necklace, it definitely cannot be worn onto the inside strand and nicely displayed as Empress Josephine is modeling it, regardless the fact that the strands have obviously being restrung over time, even if - and why not - changing the number of pearls on each strand, to modulate the way it looks at final.

I do prefer the pearls inside like the Empress, and not outside like the Queen.
What about you? do you prefer the Empress or the Queen look?

 

[CLICLASP]

to be continued ...

 

[Lady_Disdain]

Lovely and just the sort of touch to be expected in royal jewelry.

However, I am disappointed that the catalogue doesn't mention this. It brings up doubts in my mind as to whether the strands are original, which is an important point in a historical piece.

 

[CLICLASP]

That's why I was talking of " secret", but just my story-telling, my investigation and my guess ; and my pleasure to share it with you
The Lady in charge with the sale did not say more that what was in the catalogue, no proof of original stringing, this is really impossible to state…
Story Not finished yet.

 

[lisa c]

Judging from the sales photo, the strand appears 'reduced' (as in 'embarrassed') but portrait vs photograph is no fair way to judge, as you say. It doesn't look as sumptuous, now, from a distance anyway.

Would a stiffening wire ever have been threaded through the strand, to give support to a pronounced curve?

One more vote for the Empress version of the necklace here (and a wiggle of delight that we commoners can own gorgeous pearls! I know I'm repeating myself, but delight is here, and now).

 

[BAS]

Wonderful journey! I'm looking forward to the next installment. Food photos along the way are much enjoyed, too!