Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
4:48 pm
May 3, 2013
Offline
Full Cheapside Hoard goes on display for first time
The Cheapside Hoard is an unprecedented collection of jewelry from the late 16th and early 17th century discovered in 1912 by workers demolishing the Wakefield House in Cheapside, London, near St. Paul’s Cathedral. They drove a pickaxe into the cellar floor and hit a decayed wooden box that had been hidden there centuries earlier before the Great London Fire of 1666. Inside the box were trays of jewelry, nearly 500 pieces made of gold, enamel and gemstones from all over the world:
11:18 pm
January 3, 2012
Offline
This indeed is a very lucky find, there is a chance of course that a lot more jewellery is still hidden elsewhere. I know Cromwell destroyed a lot of the pre civil war jewellery, so much in fact that I know when King Charles 2nd was restored to throne that the crown jewels had to be completely remade. It would be nice to think that hidden somewhere is Anne’s A and B necklaces. I’m guessing that they could possibly be in Hever somewhere. Was anything mentioned by the Victorians about a necklace being found in the grave they unearthed in the Chapel of St Peter ad Vincula? (St Peter in chains it translate as so I believe) Rumour has it the B necklace was buried with her, but if it wasn’t who has it now or where could they both possibly be. Were they destroyed in Cromwell’s time or did someone hide them?
Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod
11:24 pm
May 3, 2013
Offline
I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that Henry had the famous necklace remade into something for his new Queen, Bo; he was that insensitive. I can never get over how gratuitously unfeeling and plain greedy Henry could be: for instance, his taking-back of Mary’s christening gown from Katherine; heartless and penny-pinching cruelty.
As far as I’m aware, there’s no legend stating that Anne gave the necklace to someone as a memento (unlike, say, the pendant she supposedly gave to a certain Captain Gwynne at the last).
2:20 am
January 3, 2012
Offline
SteveJ said
I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that Henry had the famous necklace remade into something for his new Queen, Bo; he was that insensitive. I can never get over how gratuitously unfeeling and plain greedy Henry could be: for instance, his taking-back of Mary’s christening gown from Katherine; heartless and penny-pinching cruelty.
As far as I’m aware, there’s no legend stating that Anne gave the necklace to someone as a memento (unlike, say, the pendant she supposedly gave to a certain Captain Gwynne at the last).
Yep you are right there Steve, Henry was a complete selfish, insensitive onanist. I also heard that when K.P became Queen he gave her all of K.H clothes so that she could look the part. As for cruelity where’s my rusty shears? Henry needs his Doobies cut off. He was just a git toward everyone and everything, he truly does deserve a bit of 21 century justice woman style. LOL 
Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod
6:40 am
May 3, 2013
Offline
Indeed, he was – as we in the scholastic business term him – a ‘bin bag of right royal rubbish’. 
Incidentally…once again, Lady Bo, I have proven myself the quintessential Tudor Twit. In future, I shall leave these matters to the experts:
Where did Anne Boleyn’s B necklace go?
1:33 am
November 18, 2010
Offline
Boleyn said
< I also heard that when K.P became Queen he gave her all of K.H clothes so that she could look the part.
Given that as queen KP needed a lot of seriously rich and highly expensive fabrics simply to display her postion, giving KP the clothes of her predecessor makes a lot of sense. KP and her ladies and her tailors would be expected to reuse the fabrics rather than the clothes themselves.
But I expect things like sleeves were better able to be re-used rather than a custom made kirtle or bodice. It was a matter of thrift rather than a delibrate attempt to remind KP what the king was capable of.
It's always bunnies.
