Hermann Marcus, founder of Marcus & Co, was born in Germany in 1828. As a young man, before moving to New York City in 1850, he gained experience at Ellemeyer, the court jewellers in Dresden.  His first job in New York was at Tiffany & Co, though he soon moved to Black, Ball & Co.  In 1864 he started his own firm, a partnership with Theodore Starr, forming Starr and Marcus. Though highly successful the firm was dissolved in 1877, at which point Marcus returned to Tiffany.  In 1884 Marcus again left Tiffany to become a partner in the firm of Jacques and Marcus where his son William was already a partner, and in 1892, when Georges Jacques retired, the firm became known as Marcus & Co. They exhibited at the 1900 Exposition Universelle in Paris, where they showed beautiful examples of floral jewelry decorated with plique-à-jour enamel.  Their exhibit there was praised by the famed French goldsmith and jewellery historian Henri Vever, who was often a candid critic of foreign work.

The present piece is a fine example of the type of designs at which Marcus & Co excelled in producing—highly colourful jewels in the Art Nouveau style.  Marcus followed in the footsteps of his former employer, Tiffany & Co, whose designers were pioneers in using vibrant gemstones and enamelling to create beautiful and unusual color combinations.  Though often compared to the jewelry of the famous Louis Comfort Tiffany, who created a line of ‘art jewels’ for his father’s firm for which he became artistic director in 1902, Marcus’ work shows perhaps a stronger influence of Paulding Farnham, who preceded Louis in that post.  The lushness of both the gems and goldwork in combination with the impeccable enamelling is more reminiscent of the jewels Farnham displayed at the 1893 and 1900 Exhibitions, than of jewellery coming out of Louis Tiffany’s workshop, which operated independently of that of the larger firm.  Louis’ work was experimental in both technique and design, with a finish perhaps more akin to the Arts and Crafts jewelers of Great Britain, while both Farnham’s and Marcus’ jewels are marked by the precision of a long-established workshop, more in keeping with the French tradition of high jewelry-making.  Though both excellent in their own rights, Marcus’ jewelry seems to have been geared toward society elite, whereas Louis’ jewels appealed to the wealthy boheme.  But regardless of intended clientele, due to its attention to quality and design, Marcus & Co is firmly established as one of America’s most important jewelry firms, and this piece displays all for which it is renown, making it not only beautiful but a significant and important piece of jewelry history.

REFERENCES

Clare Phillips, Bejewelled by Tiffany:  1837-1987, London:  Yale University Press, 2006.

Joseph Sataloff, Art Nouveau Jewelry, Bryn Mawr, PA:  Dorrance & Company, 1984.

Vivienne Becker, Art Nouveau Jewelry, London:  Thames and Hudson, 1998.

Jules Wièse (1819-1890) is considered to be one of the finest French jewellers of the nineteenth century.  He was among three preeminent Parisian goldsmiths producing exquisite silver jewellery in the Neo-Renaissance style, the other two being Frédéric-Jules Rudolphi and François-Désiré Froment-Meurice.

Born in Berlin, Wièse was apprenticed there to the court goldsmith Johann Georg Hossauer before moving to Paris.  In France he first worked under J.-V. Morel as a chaser and jeweller, and finally for the aforementioned Froment-Meurice from 1839.  By 1844 he is recorded as holding the position of workshop manager, and in the same year he registered his own maker’s mark (as seen on the present piece).  In the next year he opened his own workshop with twenty five craftsmen at 7 Rue Jean Pain Molet, first working exclusively for Froment-Meurice, for which he was awarded a Collaborator’s Medal at the 1849 Paris Exposition.  By the next Paris Exposition, in 1855, Wièse exhibited under his own name, winning himself a First Class Medal for his work in the Neo-Renaissance style, as seen in this brooch.  His contemporary M. Magne wrote the following of him and his display: ‘[Wièse is a] fine goldsmith and jeweller with an already distinguished reputation which can only be enhanced by his display. The importance of his pieces and his brave experiments reveal, even in the most modest work, an awareness of art and beauty which deserves to be encouraged by the jury’.  More medals for his work were to follow, including the Medal of Honour at the 1862 London Exposition.  After his death in 1890, his son Louis Wièse assumed management of the firm, registering his own maker’s mark in that year.

The present brooch is a fine and rare example of Jules Wièse’s independent work.  The piece bears both the maker’s mark ‘JW’ above a star in a vertical lozenge, and the more general mark ‘WIESE’, which was used by both the father and son in conjunction with their respective marks.  The vast majority of the extant jewels made by the Wiese firm bear the mark of the son, not the father, rendering this piece extremely uncommon.  Furthermore, it is in his most celebrated style, the Neo-Renaissance, for which, as mentioned, he was awarded a First Class Medal at the 1855 Exposition.  Based on the use of his own mark, and not bearing that of Froment-Meurice in addition, it is possible that this brooch could date to the period just after his frequent collaboration with his master, which ended around Froment-Meurice’s death in 1855.  However, so little remains of Jules’ work that it is difficult to narrow the date range for this piece from when he was working on his own until his death.  Judging from his contemporary, Emile Froment-Meurice (son of François-Désiré), silver jewellery in the Neo-Renaissance style continued to be popular into the 1880s.  Interestingly, Emile F.-M. produced silver jewellery with similar themes—a silver phoenix brooch, and a silver circular openwork brooch composed of the emblem of François I, France’s most famous Renaissance era monarch, for example—which based on their marks place their manufacture post-1878, perhaps suggesting that this brooch also dates from that time.  What is certain is its rarity and the high quality of its design and manufacture, which upon close examination leaves the observer with little surprise as to why the jewellery of Jules Wièse was, and continues to be, so exalted.

REFERENCES

Frances Wilson and Caroline Crisford, ed.s, The Belle Époque of French Jewellery: 1850-1910, London:  Thomas Heneage & Co. Ltd., 1991.

Henri Vever, Katherine Purcell (trans.), French Jewellery of the Nineteenth Century, London:   Thames & Hudson, 2001 (1906-1908).

The cameo—defined as a gem, usually either a mineral or a shell, upon which a design has been carved in relief—is believed to have originated in Hellenistic Greece, during the third century BC.  These miniature sculptures, at that time confined to the medium of hardstone, are thought to have been made with the primary purpose of personal adornment.  The same practice of mounting cameos in jewellery was then continued by the Ancient Romans, and they are known to have been worn by many a Roman emperor.

After the fall of Rome the fashion for cameos went into a decline, until it was again revived during the Renaissance period, brought about by a keen interest in the ancient world.  At this time both antique and contemporary cameos were mounted in jewellery, as well as collected as objet d’art.  The art of cameo cutting was revived in Italy, where it would remain a centre for the coming centuries.  Again there was a lull in interest in carved gemstones, until the Neoclassical revival of the eighteenth century, largely stimulated by the discoveries of the ancient Roman cities of Pompeii and Herculaneum.  As with the Renaissance, antique specimens were generally prized over modern cameos, and the worldliest men in Europe held them among their collections of art and antiques.  That said, carving centres in Rome and Torre del Greco (near Naples) in Italy were established in response to the demand of the Grand Tourists, who travelled to Italy and Greece to become educated in the wonders of the ancient world.  It was at this time that shell cameos, mostly made in Torre del Greco due to its proximity to the sea, became more popular, owing to the relative ease in carving shell over hardstone.  In addition to Rome, hardstone cameos also became a specialty of Idar Oberstein, Germany, which had a long history with both the gem mining and cutting trade.

In a shift away from the collector’s cases of the previous century, the nineteenth century saw a strengthening in the fashion for wearable cameos.  After the Empress Josephine donned a cameo-set suite of jewellery at the coronation of Napoleon in 1804, cameo jewellery became all the rage.  Napoleon played a further hand in promoting the art by establishing a gemstone carving school in Paris, inspired by his appreciation for the arts of the ancient world. By the mid-nineteenth century shell cameos, in part due to their lightness compared with hardstone cameos, were the height of fashion.  Large shell cameos as well as hardstone cameos were set into contemporary mounts, often as suites of jewellery.  Some of the best cameos of the nineteenth century—carved by a select group of recognized carvers—were set into revivalist mounts, corresponding to the subject matter.

In Victorian England cameo jewellery was particularly prized, due in part to the fact that the Queen owned and wore a number of cameo jewels.  One example which can often be seen in official portraits is the Badge of the Order of Victoria and Albert, carved by Tommaso Saulini of Rome, who also produced cameos for the maker of the present suite, John Brogden.  To meet demand some carvers set themselves up in London, including William Schmidt, a German carver from Idar Oberstein, who produced cameos for top London jewellers, including Brogden, Carlo Giuliano and Child & Child.  In fact, Schmidt purports to have been the first to carve cameos out of opal, which Brogden reportedly displayed in the Paris Exhibition of 1878. An extant example, now in the collection of the British Museum, was set by the Giuliano firm.

Regarding subject matter, cameos throughout time have been largely figural, from bust length profile portraits to scenes with multiple full-length figures, and sometimes animals.  Ancient Greek and Roman cameos often depicted mythological scenes as well as contemporary figures.  During the Renaissance, mythological scenes were popular, often taken directly from ancient sculpture, as well as portraits of notable contemporary figures.  During the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, due to the revivalist styles, both Renaissance and Classical subjects were copied and set into matching (and sometimes unmatching) revivalist mounts.  From the Renaissance through the Victorian era, being able to recognize the source of the carving in a cameo was a mark of erudition, revealing in the wearer knowledge of Classical art.

As mentioned, the present cameo parure was made by one of the top purveyors of Victorian cameos of the nineteenth century, John Brogden.   He first apprenticed for a London watch and clockmaker with a workshop at Bridgewater Square, where he became a partner with James William Garland in 1831.  He was then a partner at the firm of Watherston and Brogden, a goldsmithing firm located at 16 Henrietta Street in Convent Garden, fully taking control of the business in 1864—the premise he held when this suite was made.  Brogden created jewels in various revivalist styles, most notably the Renaissance and Archaeological revival modes, the latter much inspired by the work of the famed Italian jeweller Castellani.  Brodgen exhibited in the 1851 Great Exhibition in London, the 1855 Paris Exposition, and won a gold medal for his jewellery at the 1867 Paris Exposition.

John Brogden was one of the premier dealers in cameo jewellery in London, setting both hardstone and shell cameos made by the best carvers in Italy.  He was also a collector of antique cameos, at times lending pieces from his important collection to the South Kensington Museum (today the Victoria & Albert Museum).  Furthermore, his wife was an Italian scholar on the subject, one of her accomplishments being that she translated Augusto Castellani’s Gems:  Notes and Extracts.  A number of cameo-set jewels made by Brogden are part of important museum collections, including the Victoria & Albert Museum, the British Museum and the Birmingham Museum.

The mounts in this parure are in the Greek revival style, indicated by the use of palmette plaques, an ancient Greek design element.  The use of twisted wire, gold beading and fringe elements were typical of a more generalized Archeological revival style popular during the third quarter of the nineteenth century.  The subject of the cameos themselves is also classical, depicting Selene, the Greco-Roman goddess of the moon, shown full-length riding a serpentine dragon in the brooch, and in profile wearing her crescent moon headdress in the earrings.  The cameos themselves are unsigned, as was common with shell cameos.  However, Brogden very often set cameos by the famed carver Tommaso Saulini, and then after his death in 1864, his son Luigi, who are known to have worked in both shell and in hardstone.  Thus it is quite possible that the cameos in the present set were made by Luigi Saulini (son rather than father, based on the fact that the marks on the case date the piece to after the 1867 Exhibition).  There is a very fine hardstone Saulini cameo set in a Greek revival mount by Brogden in the British Museum.

REFERENCES

Charlotte Gere and Judy Rudoe, Jewellery in the Age of Queen Victoria:  A Mirror to the World, London:  British Museum Press, 2010.

Hugh Tait, 7000 Years of Jewellery, London:  British Museum Press, 1986.

Michelle Rowan, Nineteenth Century Cameos, Woodbridge:  The Antiques Collectors’ Club, 2004.

This rare necklace was made by the famed Parisian house of Froment-Meurice, most likely circa 1860, at a time when the firm was newly under the second generation management of Émile Froment-Meurice (1837-1913).  Émile was son of renowned French jeweller François-Désiré Froment-Meurice (1802-1855), described by Victor Hugo as the Cellini of his day, and who is still considered the premier French goldsmith of the nineteenth century.  François-Désiré won many international prizes and entertained elite clientele, including royalty from throughout Europe.  Émile succeed in the challenging task of maintaining the excellence of his father’s firm, becoming an acclaimed designer in his own right.  Under his stewardship the firm was awarded a gold medal at the 1867 Paris World Exhibition for its jewellery, the Grand Prix for orfèverie at the 1889 Paris World Exhibition, and he himself awarded the cross of the Legion of Honour in 1869, in addition to numerous other awards throughout the tenure of his management.

The present necklace is in a fitted box marked ‘372 rue St Honoré’, a location which the firm occupied from 1856 through the last decade of the century.  Based on the design, settings and diamond cuts, this necklace likely dates from the early part of Émile’s management.  The structure of the links—heavy, repeating oblong openwork silver forms— is similar to the later jewels of Froment-Meurice père, and thus was most probably made shortly after his death, when the workshop was temporarily managed by his most trusted apprentices, who were in the process of training Émile until he came of age to take official directorship in 1859.  Lattice form diamond and pearl jewels such as this appear to have been popular in France between 1850 and 1870, as exemplified by four pieces all falling within this date range illustrated in Henri Vever’s comprehensive tome, French Jewelry of the Nineteenth Century.   Furthermore, both the sturdy silver collet settings and the use of old mine and rose cut diamonds act in tandem to suggest a date of manufacture closer to the mid-nineteenth century.

On the reverse of the fitted case is a stamp upon which is written in ink ‘Madame de Mandiargues’, referring to former owner Bona de Mandiargues (1926-2000), née Tibertelli de Pisis, the Italian Surrealist painter.  On a trip to Paris in 1947 she met the Parisian Surrealist writer and poet André Pieyre de Mandiargues (1909-1991), whom she married three years later.  Notwithstanding their own successes, both Bona and her husband were closely associated with some of the most important artists and writers of the twentieth century, including Henri Cartier-Bresson, André Breton and Octavio Paz.

REFERENCES

Valérie Goupil, ‘La Madeleine ou le plus bel écrin des Froment-Meurice’, La Tribune de l’Art (online), 17 July 2005.

Bona de Mandiargues with André Breton, founder of the Surrealist movement

Amethyst is the purple variety of the gemstone species quartz, which also forms in yellow (citrine), brown (smoky quartz), pink (rose quartz) and colourless (rock crystal) varieties.  Prized since ancient times, the name derives from the Greek word ‘amethystos’, meaning ‘not intoxicated’, and was believed to hold healing and protective qualities, including the ability to defends its wearer from seduction.  It is also said to be healing to the heart, both physically and spiritually, and promotes cooperation, peace and unconditional love. For these reasons, in addition to its innate beauty and regal and feminine hue, amethyst is a fitting gemstone for the month of love, February.

Amethysts are found throughout the world, including in Russia, Brazil and Madagascar, with Russian amethysts, the mines are now largely exhausted, historically prized above all others for their deep, even reddish purple hue.  Amethyst crystals can form in relatively large sizes, with some of the biggest weighting in the range of seven hundred carats.  However, evenly saturated specimens of ideal colour are rare and can demand per carat prices similar to other precious stones.

Perhaps due to their colour—purple being traditionally associated with royalty and nobility—amethysts have long been a favourite of monarchs.  Catherine the Great of Russia financed numerous mining projects in the Ural Mountains in order to procure the stones for her use, and Queen Charlotte of England, wife of King George III, was famous for her prized amethyst bracelet, which had an estimated value of two thousand pounds in the early nineteenth century, which according to the Bank of England would equate to about one hundred and twenty thousand pounds today!

This convertible pendant brooch dates from the Edwardian era, named for King Edward VII, eldest son of Queen Victoria, who ruled the United Kingdom from 1901 to 1910.  High style jewels dating from this period, of which this piece is a superb example, share distinctive design, material, and technical features.  The ‘Edwardian’ style is among the most popular in antique jewellery today.

In terms of style, fine Edwardian jewellery is perhaps most characterized by its delicate femininity, with designs inspired directly from late eighteenth century French architecture and decorative arts.  This fascination with the ancien régime, particularly the reign of Louis XVI, has its roots in mid-nineteenth century revivalism, this particular vein popularized by the Empress Eugénie’s romanticization of her ill-fated predecessor, Marie Antoinette.  This alliance was no doubt in part propagandistic, intended to establish the legitimacy of Eugénie and Napoleon III by way of association with the French monarchy.  Eugénie commissioned jewellery copied directly from Marie Antoinette’s alleged jewels, as well as jewels in the ‘style Louis XVI’.  Brooches made by Baugrand for Eugénie in this mode were exhibited at the 1867 Paris Exhibition, which aided in spreading the style on the international level.  Though not yet waning, the Louis XVI style was bolstered via the Paris Exhibition of 1889—the centennial of the outbreak of the French Revolution—where jewellers such as Boucheron exhibited designs under the same stylistic description.   Around the same time as Edward’s ascension to the throne, the house of Cartier took up the Louis XVI style in earnest, putting their own distinctive spin on it.  Jacques Cartier encouraged his designers to go out into Paris and sketch architectural elements such as boughs, laurel wreaths, and ribbons from eighteenth century buildings, resulting in what is now often referred to as the ‘garland style’.

What further distinguishes high-end Edwardian era jewels  is a confined selection of materials, namely a preference for all things white—diamonds, pearls, and platinum.  By the turn of the century diamonds and pearls were already firmly established as the king and queen of gems, however platinum was just making its widespread entrance onto the jewellery stage.  New innovations in technology at the end of the nineteenth century allowed for this hard metal to be more easily fashioned into jewellery.  Due to platinum’s strength, jewellers were able to create designs vastly more delicate than in silver or gold.  In addition, unlike silver platinum possesses the added benefit of being tarnish-resistant, making it an ideal mount for colourless diamonds.  Some of the most impressive examples of jewellery from this period display new piercing techniques made possible by the strength of platinum, by which various intricate openwork designs such as honey comb, lace, and parallel ‘knife wire’ patterns were achieved, the latter of which can be seen in the present piece.  Millegraining was also a key feature of this style, the minute beading used to hold stones almost imperceptivity in place. The result of these innovations was craftsmanship of unsurpassed delicacy, rarely if ever replicated today.

This luxurious style was readily adopted by the court of King Edward VII, a man who was particularly known, even for an heir apparent, for living a life of lavish leisure, as he was precluded from political activity for the majority of his life by the extended reign of his mother.  In contrast to the gravity of Victoria’s court, due to her devotion to the practice of mourning, a backlash against such restraint seemed to further encourage the style.  Alexandria, Queen Consort, the centre of British court life and consequently a fashion plate for the world, was often photographed covered in multiple strands of pearls and large, convertible diamond and platinum jewels.  One of her first was commissioned from Garrard’s in 1888 on the occasion of her twenty fifth wedding anniversary—a platinum tiara set with 488 large brilliant cut diamonds.  Once she ascended the throne she was free to attempt to rival the lavish crown jewels of her sister, Dagmar, who became the Empress Maria Feodorovna of Russia upon her marriage to Tsarevich Alexander III.  Alexandra commissioned numerous diamond and platinum jewels from Europe’s finest jewellery houses, including Cartier, Garrard, and Child and Child, the maker of this piece.

REFERENCES

Charlotte Gere and Judy Rudoe, Jewellery in the Age of Queen Victoria, London:  The British Museum Press, 2010.

Vivienne Becker, Antique and Twentieth Century Jewellery, London:  Gemmological Association of Great Britain, 1987.

This convertible mandolin-shaped locket dates from the second quarter of the nineteenth century, a time when romanticising the past was at the height of fashion.  The jewel is also ripe with symbolism, referring to the themes of love and harmony, as well as, though perhaps not intentionally, of Christmas.

The most striking feature of this piece is that it is in the form of a mandolin, an instrument derived from the lute, used primarily during the Renaissance and Baroque periods.  Musical instruments have long been associated with the harmony of love, and this romantic allusion would have been a clear to the owner.  Other instruments such as the hurdy-gurdy, the viol and the lyre were also popular forms in love jewellery at this time.  One commonality born by these instruments is that each was largely obsolete by the time these jewels were made, replaced in orchestras by more modern inventions, such as the guitar and the piano.  Instead of from contemporary life, the inspiration for these antiquated instruments was taken directly from Gothic and Renaissance artworks, primarily ecclesiastical sculpture and altarpieces, due to a growing taste for what are now termed the Gothic and the Renaissance Revival styles.  Designers working in this mode generally preferred to focus on romantic themes, such as beautiful muses and putti, or cherubs, playing instruments, such as in Rosso Fiorentino’s (1494-1540) Musical Angel dating from 1522.  Some of the most accomplished jewellers of the nineteenth century created works centred around these themes, the most notable of which was François-Désiré Froment-Meurice (1802-1855).  An example of his work in the Renaissance Revival style, displaying a muse and putti playing period instruments, can be seen in Berganza’s current collection (ref. 15477).

Further to the form, the locket is a quintessential love jewel, continuing the amorous theme.  The concealed compartment was created to contain a portrait of a loved one or a love token such as a lock of the lover’s hair.  Romantic symbolism also continues in the choice of materials used in this locket.  Gemstones held distinct meanings at the time this piece was created; both the emeralds and rubies refer to variants of love, the former to constant love, rebirth and fecundity, and the latter to passionate love.  The hues of these symbolic gems are echoed in the green and pink (or ‘rose’) gold used to decorate the body of the piece, as well as in the motifs, specifically the rose, another symbol of passionate love.

In addition to the theme of love, this piece bears symbolism appropriate to Christmas.  The colours—red and green—the traditional colours of Christmas, are perhaps the most obvious correlation.  Firmly established by the sixteenth century, red was adopted to represent the blood of Christ, a presage of Jesus’ crucifixion, while green represents hope, rebirth and eternal life, a reference to his imminent resurrection.  The rose, which appears on both the back and front of the locket, is often associated with Christian martyrs, as well as with the Virgin Mary.  She is often represented with roses in Medieval and Renaissances paintings; one famous example is by Sandro Bottecelli (1445-1510), the Madonna del Roseto, painted circa 1470, of the Madonna and Child in a rose garden. One final connection to the holiday, period instruments such as these, due in part to the Gothic and Renaissance revivals of the nineteenth century, are often associated with cherubs, who are frequently depicted playing instruments around the Virgin and Child in Renaissance altarpieces, and ever since have been a part of the iconography of Christmas.

REFERENCES

Geoffrey C. Munn, The Triumph of Love:  Jewelry 1530-1930, London:  Thames and Hudson, 1993.

Sometimes confused with citrine, the other November birthstone, topaz has a long and illustrious history.  Topaz is mentioned in ancient texts dating back as early as two thousand years, including the Bible.  Over this expanse of time it has been thought to possess magical qualities, including the power to dispel sadness, anger, nightmares, and also to render the wearer more attractive, intelligent, fertile and happy.

The most desired hue is a golden yellow-orange, also known as Imperial topaz, with an autumn glow which makes it a fitting gem for the month of November.  It does also form, due to various impurities or lack thereof, in brown, blue, green, red, pink and colourless.  Perhaps the most famous topaz is the Braganza ‘diamond’, a 1680 carat colourless topaz which is presently part of the Portuguese crown jewels.

Topaz can be found on every continent except Antarctica, though historically most gem quality stones have been mined in Germany, Russia and Brazil.  Its natural durability—with a hardness of 8 on the Mohs scale—along with its symbolic associations with protection and beauty make topaz an ideal gift for anyone born this month.

Emerald and gold jewels like the present piece are typical in both style and composition of Spanish jewellery of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, largely due to the country’s longstanding history with the two precious materials.

The Spanish conquistadores are famous for their quest for gold in the New World, which commenced with the explorations of Christopher Columbus in 1492.  Not only did they find gold, but also emeralds, and of a quality unseen in Europe until this time.  The Spanish crown quickly made it a priority to discover the source of the stones, and in 1538 Don Gonzalo Jiménez de Quesada, founder of Bogotá, discovered mines in central Colombia.  Examples of gold and emerald jewellery made in the Americas have been preserved due to a number of shipwrecks of Spanish galleons, most famously that of the Nuestra Señora de Atcoha, which sunk off the coast of Florida in 1622 and was rediscovered in 1985.  The hoard included one hundred and twenty five gold bars, as well as contraband jewellery and emeralds, including a seven pound gold chain and a 77.76 carat emerald.

From this time until the independence of Colombia in 1819, gold and emeralds featured heavily in Spanish jewellery.  Crosses were perhaps the most common jewellery forms, in part due Spain’s uninterrupted standing as strongly Catholic country.  That said, crosses of this type were en vogue throughout Europe in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. In 1752 the fashionable Lady Jane Coke was quoted as saying, ‘You can’t make a mistake as to the length of your cross. You may either wear it high upon your neck or let the bottom of it touch the top of your stays.’  Of various designs, most popular were the Latin and the Greek form crosses, of which the present piece is an example of the latter.  Typically crosses such as these were suspended from a bow, called ‘lazo’ in Spanish, which could be attached to a ribbon to be worn as a choker or converted to a brooch to be pinned directly to the bodice.

Both the construction and style are particularly Spanish, with table cut emeralds set into circular bosses decorated with graining and applied scrolled ornament.  Pieces such as this appear in portraits of the Spanish court from the seventeenth through the late eighteenth centuries.  It was likely made in Córdoba, Spain, which was renowned for its jewellery industry during this period.  Similar examples can be found in both the Victoria and Albert Museum (M238-1864  http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O116858/pendant/ , M.83-1913 http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O116845/pendant/) and the British Museum (1951,1009.1).

REFERENCES

Ginny Redington Dawes and Olivia Collings, Georgian Jewellery:  1714-1830, London:  Antique Collectors’ Club, 2007.

Ronald Ringsrud, Emeralds:  A Passionate Guide, Oxnard, California:  Green View Press, 2009.

Seaman Schepps was born in New York City’s tenement-dominated Lower East Side in 1881, the son of Hungarian immigrants.  Rising from these humble beginnings, he built a business that featured designs which drastically departed from the traditional modes of his day.  These adventurous jewels came to define a new style that became popular with the elite of the 1930’s—movie stars, socialites, barons of industry, and royalty—a clientele which earned him the title “America’s court jeweller”.

The present ring is typical of Schepps designs of the mid-to-late thirties.  In the early part of the decade, when he first started to produce his own jewelry in any significant quantity, his designs were, while original, predominantly symmetrical, two-dimensional and set with matched stones.  Pieces produced in the latter years of the decade, however, are markedly sculptural, oftentimes with unmatched stones in irregular arrangements, as exhibited here with sapphires of differing sizes and saturations, and the horizontally asymmetrical layout.  The use of a faceted, upturned rock crystal was revolutionary, and perhaps unique to his oeuvre, not to mention others’.

A Schepps jewel with an analogous design scheme, featuring rock crystal paired with precious gems—brilliant cut diamonds and both carved and cabochon emeralds—in an asymmetrical placement, originally in the collection of Andy Warhol and now in a private collection, dates circa 1940. Another comparable piece, this time a cuff bracelet in the collection of Phyllis J. McGuire, much like the present ring displays a vertically symmetrical design of diamonds and aquamarines, yet is set with stones of similar but distinctly varying tones, cuts, and sizes.  Schepps, who was a well-travelled man by the time these pieces were made, was likely inspired by early twentieth century art, such as Cubist and Dadaist works, as well as Asian artefacts, all of which he had the opportunity to view in New York, Paris, and San Francisco; his rejection of both symmetry and a hierarchy of materials point to these influences.

Schepps’ jewels were featured in many of the major fashion titles of his day, and regularly graced the covers of Vogue and Harper’s Bazaar. Katharine Hepburn, Coco Chanel, the Duchess of Windsor, and Gloria Vanderbilt are just a few of his illustrious patrons.  Since his arrival on the fashion scene his influence has been felt throughout the jewellery industry, and to this day his works continue to inspire. Simultaneously classic, contemporary, elegant, and bold, to own a Seaman Schepps piece is to embrace one’s individuality and not be afraid of making a statement.

REFERENCES

Amanda Vail and Janet Zapata, Seaman Schepps:  A Century of New York Jewelry Design, New York:  The Vendome Press, 2004.