But you and I are only talking about jewellery here, no politics!

@@jewellerystories Well, I'm astonished that people still assume, that important jewels have no political value! Just remember the diamond necklace affair of Marie Antoinette. Of course they have, as Napoleon knew all too well, and that is why a number of most magnificent jewels stem from his rule, especially from the coronation, for which every court lady received a certain sum which she had to spent on jewels! Do you really think that an astute politican like Sheika Moza buys jewels at random? This is clearly contradicted by the Hamsa jewel and the large gold ornament with half moon elements, which showcase her affiliation to Islam.

With that attitude, you can say that about anything, cars, clothes, watches.

@@jewellerystories Well, you could say that before and up to WWI, but not nowadays, except for important jewels. Just remember the garments of Kings and Queens, their first cars etc. I think that statement jewellery worn by leading public figures such as Queens have a political meaning, they are not just private adornments. Queen Margaretha of Denmark, who has a magnificent sense of wearing important jewels in royal style, offers an excellent example. But I have also a question: When did start the tutti-frutti style jewels by Cartier? If I remember it correctly, Daisy Fellowes was an aristocrat, who wore these jewels, but I don't know, whether she was the first to do so.