The Doris Duke Jewelry Collection

Transcription

Gems from the East and West
Janet Zapata Ulysses Dietz
Zette Emmons
Foreword
When the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation was
launched in 1996, we knew very little about Doris
Duke’s life and her work. Now, seven years later,
we have come to better understand the multiple
dimensions of Doris Duke as a generous philanthropist,
talented collector, and an independent woman with
diverse interests and an adventurous spirit.
This catalog is the third book that the foundation
has published about Doris Duke’s collections. Doris
Duke’s Shangri La, published in 2002, examines her
Islamic art collection and Honolulu home; Doris
Duke: The Southeast Asian Art Collection, published
in 2003, documents the diverse objects she collected
for a Thai Village Project that she envisioned building
in Hawaii but was never able to complete; and now
we are pleased to offer Gems of the East and West: The
Doris Duke Jewelry Collection, which catalogs the most
personal of her collections.
Doris Duke’s jewelry offers us a rare glimpse into
the evolution of her tastes and interests. This catalog
contrasts her increasingly refined and unconventional
selection of jewels against the fashions of her time
and the social conventions of the wealthy. It also
demonstrates a signature trait of Doris Duke as a
collector that is evident in her other collections and
at her estates: she became personally involved in her
acquisitions and projects, whether by redesigning
outdated jewelry, helping to restore works of art, or
designing marble floor panels for her home in Hawaii.
Upon a closer examination of each of her
collections, we have gained a more nuanced
understanding of Doris Duke, including her personal
aesthetic, discerning eye, and appreciation for unusual
and exotic works of art. We also have gained insight
into her unique and complex vision as a philanthropist.
Although she led an intensely private life, she opened
the door to her life’s work when she died, leaving the
majority of her wealth, estates, and collections to the
Doris Duke Charitable Foundation to benefit the
public and to offer people an opportunity to learn
about the cultures and the art that she devoted a
lifetime to exploring and acquiring. In the near future,
selected pieces from Doris Duke’s jewelry collection
will be auctioned, as well as other personal effects that
were left to the foundation. Proceeds from the auction
will support the work of the Doris Duke Charitable
Foundation.
We hope that this publication will help illuminate
the distinctive style, aesthetic standards, and artistic
vision that Doris Duke applied to so many aspects
of her life. It has been a labor of love for several staff
members at the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation—
including Patrick Lerch, Olga Garay, Elizabeth
Steinberg, and Kim Bedetti. The foundation’s trustees
have also been engaged in this project, especially
Marion Oates Charles, who recognized from the
beginning that Doris Duke’s jewelry was a valuable
asset not only in terms of its precious stones and stellar
craftsmanship, but also because it sheds light on the life
and times of a remarkable woman.
The Newport Restoration Foundation has been a
key partner for us in this endeavor—particularly Pieter
N. Roos and A. Bruce MacLeish, who has worked
tirelessly to organize the first exhibition of Doris
Duke’s jewelry and played a key role in the production
of this catalog. In addition, we would like
to thank Ulysses Dietz, Janet Zapata, and Zette Emmons,
whose work as the guest curators for the jewelry
exhibition has yielded a valuable interpretive source of
information about Doris Duke’s jewelry, style and life.
Finally, we are especially pleased that the first
exhibition of Doris Duke’s jewelry will be unveiled
at the J. Carter Brown Galleries at Rough Point,
which was Doris Duke’s home in Newport, Rhode
Island. Carter Brown was appointed to the board of
the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation when it was
first established, and he continued to serve on our
board until he died in 2002. His broad experience
and expertise on innumerable subjects—especially the
arts—were an invaluable resource for the foundation.
Joan E. Spero, President, Doris Duke Charitable Foundation
APRIL 2003
FOREWORD
The exhibition of Doris Duke’s jewelry collection at
Rough Point marks a turning point in the operation
of this historic site by the Newport Restoration
Foundation. The exhibition, as others that will follow
it, will engage the public in new ways by highlighting
tangible aspects of Doris Duke’s interests throughout
her life. Her jewelry obviously has not been available
for public scrutiny until this time. Nor has the NRF
had the occasion or the space to offer the public an
intense experience with works of art of this scale
surrounded by so much didactic information.
The new J. Carter Brown Galleries at Rough Point
have enabled the installation of Doris Duke’s jewelry
in a delicate and intimate fashion. The inauguration
of these galleries with this exhibition, therefore, helps
to launch a new public amenity on site, and a place
from which traveling exhibitions can be spawned that
will offer public delight at other institutions over time.
It is also anticipated that exhibitions may be brought
to Rough Point that will extend the mission of the
NRF in new ways. For this we owe the Doris Duke
Charitable Foundation a debt of gratitude. It is through
its vision and understanding that these galleries and
therefore this exhibition are possible.
These galleries are dedicated by the Trustees of
the Newport Restoration Foundation to J. Carter
Brown in gratitude for his great support and influence
on our work. He was a Trustee of both the Doris
Duke Charitable Foundation and of the Newport
Restoration Foundation. In this service, he helped
guide these related foundations during their early years.
During his distinguished career in the museum world,
Carter Brown was a passionate gatherer of works of
art of the highest quality in exhibitions that extended
knowledge and understanding of the history of culture.
He wished to share the pleasure of his own curiosity
with others. He also recognized the necessity of
engaging people with dynamic ideas portrayed through
the comparison of artifacts in beautiful settings. How
much he would have appreciated this inaugural
exhibition in these galleries for which his efforts had
created the groundwork. I congratulate NRF
Executive Director Pieter N. Roos and the NRF staff
for creating them and this exhibition.
To feature Doris Duke’s jewelry as if it were one
of her passionate collecting efforts is, however, to give
truth to a myth. While she certainly acquired jewelry
of spectacular quality during her lifetime, according to
people who knew her, Miss Duke’s jewelry became an
“unintentional collection” based on inheritance as well
as on her own personal taste. From her grandmother,
Florine Holt, and her mother, Nanaline Duke, she
acquired jewelry of classical restraint, to which she
added items of more dramatic presence, working with
designers of her own time. Built on the influence of
her forebearers, her taste was expanded by her travels
and contact with people whose knowledge of fine
things she admired. Doris Duke’s own passion for the
arts of India and Southeast Asia directed her toward
acquiring this collection of jewelry. While her jewelry
was an amenity beautifying her life, it was but just one
of the masses of wonderful objects flowing through her
experience that defined her.
As opposed to her directed and discreet collections,
or her theme-related houses in which she invested
significant amounts of focus and time, Doris Duke’s
jewelry collection consisted of a more broad-based
process of selection. In this respect, her jewelry can
give us more of an insight about her own history and
character than her other holdings. Her jewelry collection
is thus testimony to several generations of response to
conspicuous opportunities sifted through her hands.
The works that are included in this exhibition
summarize her broad cultural interests and her passion
for refinement. We are fortunate that she has left
these glittering treasures together for us to appreciate.
They—and Miss Duke through her legacy at Rough
Point—can teach us much about collecting and about
the cultures from which her objects have emanated.
We must not stop remembering the larger legacies she
left to support the maintenance of historic houses and
the support of works of art yet to be created.
Roger Mandle, President, Rhode Island School of Design
and Trustee, Newport Restoration Foundation
Acknowledgements
The coordinators of the catalog project would like to thank the Board of Trustees of
the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation for making the jewelry collection available for
exhibition and research: the late J. Carter Brown, Mrs. Marion Oates Charles, James
F. Gill, Harry B. Demopoulos, Anthony S. Fauci, Nannerl O. Keohane, John J. Mack,
and John H. T. Wilson. Our gratitude is also extended to the staff of the Doris Duke
Charitable Foundation for their practical assistance in developing the concepts for
the exhibition and catalog and for bringing both to fruition, especially Joan E. Spero,
president, Olga M. Garay, program director for the arts, Patrick Lerch, director of
properties, Elizabeth Steinberg, archivist, and Kim Bedetti, archival assistant. Thank you
also to Owen Moore, collections manager, and Sharon Littlefield, curator, Doris Duke
Foundation for Islamic Art, and Timothy Pyatt, university archivist at Duke University.
We especially thank Newport Restoration Foundation Executive Director Pieter N.
Roos for the overall supervision of the catalog and Rough Point Assistant Curator
Michele K. Musto for research and image coordination.
We are especially thankful to our colleague, Zette Emmons, whose understanding
of and experience with Indian jewelry helped complete the story of this remarkable
collection. We also recognize the enthusiastic support of Mary Sue Price, Director
of The Newark Museum, and Ward L. E. Mintz, Deputy Director for Programs and
Collections at The Newark Museum, as this project got underway.
As we compiled background material for this project, we were generously assisted
by many individuals from large and small jewelry houses, who contributed not only
information about their pieces but also provided period photographs and original art
work. For this, we owe special thanks to Bonnie Selfe, Cartier, Inc., New York; Pascale
Milhaud and Monique Gay, Cartier S. A., Geneva; Ward Landrigan and Cyd Hamby,
Verdura, Inc., New York; Stanley Silberstein, David Webb, Inc., New York; and Roshi
Ameri, Seaman Schepps, New York. We also want to thank Stephen Lash, Sheri Farber,
Simon Teakle,Veridiana Pontes-Ring and Daphne Lingon at Christie’s, New York, for
their assistance with various aspects of the collection.
The history of many early pieces was enhanced by the research of Linda McCurdy,
Elizabeth B. Dunn, Janie C. Morris, Eleanor Mills and Ian Lekus of the Duke
University Rare Book, Manuscript, and Special Collections Library. Photographs of
the Duke family were supplied by Lisa Dubisz, Motion Picture and Television Photo
Archive Image Vault; Anthony Sullivan, Hulton Archive, Getty Images; Sue Daly,
Sotheby’s, London; George Hurrell, Jr.; and Cupie and Digi Singh.
We are indebted to Ricardo Zapata for his editorial assistance toward melding the
introduction into a coherent whole, and to Patty MacLeish for her unerring editorial eye
in picking out problems we could no longer see. Lastly, we thank photographers Richard
and Elizabeth Walker and designer Darcy Magratten whose talents truly brought the
beauty of this collection to these pages.
Ulysses Dietz, The Newark Museum
A. Bruce MacLeish, Newport Restoration Foundation
Janet Zapata, Jewelry Historian
Janet Zapata
Ulysses Dietz
Zette Emmons
Published by:
Doris Duke Charitable Foundation
650 Fifth Avenue, 19th floor
New York, New York 10019
Tel: (212) 974-7000
www.ddcf.org
In association with:
Newport Restoration Foundation
51 Touro Street
Newport, Rhode Island 02840
Tel: (401) 849 -7300
www.newportrestoration.org
Copyright 2003 by the
Doris Duke Charitable Foundation
All rights reserved
ISBN 0 – 9725588-1- 0 9000
Library of Congress 2003104496
Cover photo: Diamond and pearl festoon necklace (Fig. 15)
Cover photograph, photograph by David Franzen (p.6 ),
photograph by Shuzo Uemoto (p.7), photographs pages 4, 5, 27,
33, 34, 45, 55, 75, 95, and the photographs of figures 1 through
296 copyright Doris Duke Charitable Foundation. Illustrations
and photographs from the following collections are used with
permission: Newport Restoration Foundation, Newport,
Rhode Island; Sotheby’s London; Duke University Rare Book,
Manuscript, and Special Collections Library; Motion Picture
Television Photo Archive Image Vault; George Hurrell; Cupie and
Digi Singh; Houghton Archive care of Getty Images. Drawings
from Verdura, Inc.; David Webb, Inc.; Cartier, Inc.
Photography: Richard and Elizabeth Walker
Design: Darcy Magratten
Printing: Meridian Printing
Curators’ PREFACE
Doris Duke was a remarkable woman. She was a tireless traveler, a prodigious builder and
renovator of houses, and an insatiable collector. While her collections of Asian and Islamic art
are relatively well known across the country, one of her most fascinating collections is the one
that was known only to her family and friends and, even then, only in bits and pieces—
her jewelry. In fact, Miss Duke did not consider it a collection at all: it was just her personal
jewelry, ranging from antique heirloom pieces from her grandmother to the latest fashionable
examples of the 1960s crafted by society jewelers such as David Webb, Inc. The one facet of her
jewelry that Miss Duke might have thought of as a collection was the Indian jewelry, which
she began to acquire on her wedding trip in 1935 and continued to add to throughout most of
her life. However, as is often the case with jewelry, Miss Duke saw this collection as something
without scholarly or art-historical interest. It was something that either she liked and wore or
that had intimate, personal meaning from important moments in her life.
Part of Miss Duke’s feeling about her jewelry would have derived from the fact that, until
the past fifteen years or so, few American museums had any interest in the history of jewelry.
Even fewer had done any scholarly work on the jewelry they did own, unless it came from the
Renaissance or antiquity. Hence, she had no way of knowing that her wonderful collection
of jewels—hundreds of objects in a myriad of styles and materials—could indeed tell a story.
As we look at it today, Doris Duke’s 399-piece jewelry collection not only tells the story of
her life, but it also tells a story of America in the latter part of the nineteenth and most of
the twentieth centuries. Far from having no art-historical interest, it offers us insights into
changing taste from the 1850s to the end of the twentieth century, as well as shedding light
on the complex social customs of the Indian subcontinent in the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries. Even in the fragments of jewels—components from original pieces refashioned into
more modern pieces—there is a story of ceaseless change and restless energy.
It is our privilege to provide an account of the story of Doris Duke’s least known
collection as an introduction to the exhibition of 110 pieces selected from it. This exhibition,
which is the first and only time this diverse group of jewels will be seen together, is organized
into the five following groupings: inherited pieces, jewelry from Nanaline Duke, Miss Duke’s
early Western jewelry, her later Western jewelry, and her Eastern jewelry. For each section,
this catalog includes a brief contextual introduction followed by photographs and descriptive
information, including some original design drawings, photographs, and other documentation,
about each of the exhibited pieces. At the front of the catalog, two essays provide more
detailed background material that will help foster an understanding of and appreciation for
Doris Duke’s lifetime pursuit of beauty.
Janet Zapata Ulysses Dietz Zette Emmons
1
Duke homestead, Durham, North Carolina
The Duke Family
The flash of light off the facets of a diamond is designed to catch our eye. It is brilliance
and sparkle, but there is more. The ice is only the tip of the berg in a creation that is a
combination of design, craftsmanship, aesthetic detail, geology, and a certain amount of
passion. There is history too.
Whether she was at age twenty-five or seventy-five, Doris Duke consistently devoted
painstaking attention to her homes and collections. She was a woman of passions, and her
outlook on life was both grand and intimate. Only now after her death are her complexity
and her many interests becoming evident to those who lived outside her private circle. She
was a collector with an educated and perceptive eye, but her interests went deeper than that.
She had a passion for all things aesthetic, whether it was Islamic art, historic preservation,
music and dance, or the natural environment around us. She also had a particular gift from her
father in the form of financial resources to pursue these many interests.
The jewelry of Doris Duke is fascinating. Because of the very personal nature of
jewelry, it offers us an intimate insight into her interests and her history. Throughout her
adult life, Doris Duke had a fascination for art and decorative arts from the Middle and Far
East, and a large part of the jewelry collection reflects this lifelong interest. The jewelry also
gives us a rare glimpse into the personal history of the Duke family beyond what can be
gleaned from the other Duke collections. Within its gold, gemstones, and craftsmanship are
captured the personal character of one hundred years of this family that rode the crest of
American wealth.
The foundation of the Duke family’s prominence was laid in the years shortly after
the Civil War when Washington Duke, Doris Duke’s grandfather, built a successful regional
business in tobacco growing and processing. His sons, Benjamin and James Buchanan
Duke, through good salesmanship, clever use of technology, and a goodly measure of
business acumen, built this into an empire that became the American Tobacco Company,
one of the earliest and most powerful monopolies of its day. Upon this fortune James B.
2
“Buck” Duke built yet another, based
on electricity, when he founded Duke
Power and lit up the Piedmont of the
Carolinas. Although the Duke tobacco
business and Duke Power were based in
North Carolina, James B. Duke found it
necessary to establish offices in New York,
the economic capitol of the United States.
It was from these offices that he transacted
most of his business. He was at heart a
product of the southern countryside,
not the big city, but his greatest love was
building and maintaining his business
empire. Living and working in New York
was for him an unfortunate side effect of
his success, and for a long period of his
life, he was truly married to his work.
He married in 1904, but the union
did not last long. In 1907, he married a
beautiful and recently widowed native
Doris Duke and her father, James Buchanan Duke
of Macon, Nanaline Holt Inman. For
Nanaline, New York was a great and welcome adventure. Far more socially aspiring than her
husband, she was only too happy to leave her native Georgia behind. It was with Nanaline
that James B. Duke embarked on his great domestic building program. At the time, he
owned houses in Durham, North Carolina, New York City, and Hillsborough, New Jersey.
Construction of his estate in New Jersey was already well underway at the time of his second
marriage, but for his new wife he determined to add a palatial house overlooking its 2,700
rolling acres of forests, fields, and ponds, most of which he had created himself. He also sold
his house in New York and replaced it with a substantial new residence on the corner of Fifth
Avenue and 78th Street. Both of these structures were designed by the renowned architect,
Horace Trumbauer, in a French palatial style that was in keeping with the grand houses of
their social peers.
November 22, 1912 saw the entrance into the world of James B. and Nanaline’s first and
only child, Doris. She was born into one of the wealthiest families in America and a rarefied
atmosphere of privilege. From the first, Doris was the darling of her father, a man already in
his fifties. He offered her the best that he could provide, but he also conveyed to her much
of his own philosophy and sensibilities. Throughout her life, she enjoyed the large estate that
her father had left her, but she was at the same time careful never to fritter away money, as
so many other children of fortune had.
3
Doris Duke and Aletta Morris at Bailey’s Beach, summer 1924
An outing to Rough Point with friends in the mid 1950s
4
Nanaline was never fond of the New Jersey
estate, and ultimately the new house there was
never completed, although plans were drawn and a
foundation was built. What Nanaline had set her sights
upon instead was the more prestigious social mecca of
Newport. After summering there from 1915 through
1921, the Dukes finally purchased the former home of
Frederick Vanderbilt at Rough Point. Set on nine acres
of beautiful waterfront property, it was one of the finest
building sites that Newport had to offer. Once again,
architect Horace Trumbauer stepped in, this time to
alter an existing structure rather than to build anew.
The resulting summer home, finished in 1924, was
clearly an expression of Nanaline’s taste and desires.
James B. Duke saw only two summers there before he
died on October 10, 1925. Just twelve at the time, Doris
was devastated by his death.
Nanaline and her daughter were left with each
other at the start of Doris’s teenage years. Doris grew
up in many places, but spent most of her time in New
York, where she received private tutoring. She adored
Duke Farms near Hillsborough, New Jersey. The estate
was truly a creation of her father, and she associated it
with him. It was certainly a touchstone through her life
and was the house that she identified as her home and
principal residence. Her business affairs and personal
finances were managed through its offices, and it was
where all of her family photographs were kept. At all
of her houses one can find evidence of her pursuits, but
it is at Duke Farms that one finds them in abundance.
Playing the piano was an obsession for her. In Newport
and Honolulu one finds pianos, but at Duke Farms
there are six.
Through the rest of her youth, Doris Duke spent
her summers at Rough Point. The surviving diary of
her close childhood friend, Aletta Morris, gives a good
picture of her activities. As children the girls were very
close, and Aletta’s diary records in detail the round of
activities that included tennis, various outings, and games,
as well as lengthy visits to Bailey’s Beach, the private
beach of which both families were members.
One suspects that Doris Duke chafed at the
bonds that held young women captive in the
1920s and 1930s. She felt the urge to travel and
explore cultures and lifestyles different from those
within which she had been raised. In 1935, at the
age of twenty-two, she married James Cromwell,
and the two embarked on a honeymoon tour of
the world. She traveled to Eastern destinations
for the first time, visiting such countries as Egypt,
India, Thailand, and China. These travels had a
profound effect on the rest of her life for they
spurred her interest in Asia and the Islamic world,
an interest which expressed itself subsequently
through Doris Duke’s perpetual travels and her
Doris Duke and James Cromwell in India
passion for collecting.
Though she collected broadly on her
honeymoon, in time Doris Duke focused her energy on building two particular collections:
one of Southeast Asian art and the other of arts from the Islamic world. It was during her
honeymoon that she also began collecting jewelry from these cultures.
In her lifetime, Doris Duke was unable to identify a locale she felt would be suitable to
house her Southeast Asian art collection, and, as a result, much of the collection has recently
been donated to the Walters Art Museum in Baltimore and the Asian Art Museum in San
Francisco. In contrast, Doris Duke envisioned her Islamic art collection as an integral part
of the only home she ever built for herself, Shangri La, in Honolulu, Hawaii, where the
collection remains to this day.
The origins of Shangri La as a home also stem from Doris Duke’s honeymoon. The
final stop on their world tour, Honolulu, proved to be a hit with the newlyweds. They
extended their planned stay of two weeks to nearly four months, purchased property in the
following year, and began building the estate soon after. Likely influenced by recent travels,
the couple decided to design Shangri La with an eye towards the forms and functions seen
in Islamic architecture and to furnish the home with examples of Islamic art.
To some, the synthesis of a Hawaiian locale and Islamic art at an estate called Shangri
La may seem peculiar, but it posed no dilemmas for Doris Duke. She was drawn to the
aesthetics of Islamic art and loved the outdoor lifestyle of Hawaii, so pairing the two in
what was to be a very private retreat was natural. Participating in the designing and building
of the estate afforded Doris Duke with what was probably her first real opportunity for
creative expression on a grand scale. She was intimately involved in every decision from
landscaping to the number of rooms, from materials used in the building to the placement
of her collection around her home. The estate was substantially complete by 1939, but, in a
sense, Doris Duke’s work at Shangri La had only just begun. She initiated and monitored
several major renovations, both conceptually and physically, in every decade of her life.
5
Playhouse at Shangri La
Ocean front of Rough Point
A woman of contrasts, she reveled in the sweeping, tremendous ocean views from her
homes in Newport and Honolulu, swimming often in both the warm Pacific and chilly
Atlantic. But she was just as attentive to the details of a lovely piece of jewelry or the
appearance of a particular orchid. Sometimes the refinement of Newport society called
to her, sometimes the casual beach life of Hawaii. She was fascinated by the heritage of
Newport, but also by distant cultures in the East.
As Nanaline Duke aged, she eventually stopped using her houses in Newport and
New York, and she and her daughter pondered what should be done with them. In 1958
the house at One East 78th Street was donated to New York University for its Institute of
Fine Arts, a purpose that it fulfills to this day. Rough Point’s fate was less certain. An initial
attempt was made to donate it to Newport Hospital, but the offer met with little interest.
Most of Newport’s Gilded Age houses were considered to be white elephants at the time,
and Rough Point apparently fell into that category as far as the trustees of the hospital were
concerned. At some point, Doris Duke changed her mind about discarding the house,
although sadly there is little evidence for how or why her affections for the property grew.
What is clear is that during the last years of the 1950s, she began to purchase works of art
for the house. Evidence from this period indicates that the house was nearly empty, a blank
canvas. Tapestries, a few pieces of furniture, and antique wallpaper started the redecorating
campaign. Eventually much of the art and furniture from the New York house also found
its way to Newport, but throughout the next thirty years, she continued to fine-tune the
house and its appearance. She had an extraordinary aesthete’s eye and a gift for assembling
ostensibly uncoordinated items into an attractive and dynamic pattern. Over time the house
became one of her favorites, and towards the end of her life she spent as much time in it
as she spent in any of her houses. Rough Point became a focus for collections of European
fine and decorative arts, just as Shangri La had been a focus for her superb Islamic art.
Although Doris Duke assembled many interesting collections over the course of her life, no
other house became a center of such focused collecting activity as did these two residences.
6
Pierced-work Ming wine jar
in Rough Point collection
Pair of eighteenth-century
doors from Turkey at Shangri La
An intrinsic part of Doris Duke’s eye as a collector was her
interest in using her own hands in the pursuit of craftsmanship, and
her ceramics are an outstanding example. Careless cleaning and
the hazards of everyday life took their toll on the huge number of
ceramics that furnished every house. Feeling a keen interest not
only in the objects themselves but also in their care, she received
tutoring from a ceramics conservator and took great pride in
repairing and restoring broken items great and small. In every house
she kept a collection of ceramic conservation supplies. She also hired
Philip Mello, a skilled, local Newport woodworker and carver, to
care for her extensive collections of furniture. He worked not only
with the furniture at Rough Point but for the other residences as
well. Most of his work was carried out in a shop on the third floor
at Rough Point, where Doris Duke was a frequent visitor to see
what activity he was pursuing. However, she was also a participant,
sometimes working for two or three weeks on a single, intricate
project. This work was not restricted to Rough Point; she was also
actively engaged in caring for the collection at Shangri La, including
cleaning, repairing, and assisting restorers. Jin deSilva, a longtime
resident and employee in Hawaii, recalls that she climbed up on
scaffolding to work on tile panels and that she and her staff would
sit around the patio working on the collections in an assembly-line
manner. Such participation always produces a greater appreciation
for craftsmanship and was certainly a factor in choosing the art and
jewelry that she acquired.
The jewelry is but one of many collections that included such
diverse tastes as ancient bronzes and English portraiture, but the
woman who kept and assembled this jewelry had a depth and a
history that are part and parcel of the collection itself. Ultimately,
Doris Duke’s legacy is the charitable expression of her many passions,
through agencies such as the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, the
Newport Restoration Foundation, the Duke Farms Foundation and
the Doris Duke Foundation for Islamic Art. Jazz, dance, the natural
environment, and the many beautiful things that caught her wellpracticed eye represent her bequests to the public, but the intimacy
of this outstanding collection adds a unique and intriguing facet to
the story.
Pieter N. Roos, Executive Director, Newport Restoration Foundation
Sharon Littlefield, Curator, Doris Duke Foundation for Islamic Art
7
The doris Duke jewelry collection
Until not too long ago, jewelry was associated with aristocracy and power. Only nobles
needed gold and gemstones, and indeed they bedecked themselves with precious jewels
in order to remind themselves and their vassals just how important they were. Jewelry,
because it was inherently precious, was synonymous with wealth, and wealth was intimately
associated with power.
Eventually, as ordinary people began to prosper, they desired the trappings of power
and wealth. In colonial America, a small but steady demand for gold jewelry made by local
craftsmen grew until, by the beginning of the 1800s, it warranted the start of a small jewelry
“factory” by Epaphras Hinsdale in a modest New Jersey farm town called Newark.1
By the middle of the nineteenth century, not only was there a well-established jewelry
industry in this country—and not just in Newark but in every good-sized city in the
nation—but there was also a vast middle-class market for the latest fashions of solid gold
jewelry from Europe. Jewelry, once the province of the mighty, had become a desirable
commodity for the rising bourgeoisie; once a luxury only for the very rich, it had become
a necessity for the average American. Women had to have pearl necklaces and gold
bracelets and diamond rings. Men had to have gold collar buttons and sleeve buttons and
tie pins, as well as the requisite gold watch and chain with accoutrements such as seals and
pocketknives. To cope with this growing demand, Newark factories employed hundreds of
men, women, and children, working six days a week, to make solid gold jewelry.2
It was in this world of “jewelry as necessity” that Doris Duke’s maternal grandmother,
Florine Russell Holt, was born and raised and married Thaddeus Holt, Jr., who came from
a prosperous Macon, Georgia, family. The Holt family suffered financial ruin, probably in
the panic of 1883, and Thaddeus later died at sea, leaving his widow and teenage daughter
Nanaline to fend for themselves in genteel poverty. However, in the years before the hard
times, Thaddeus had purchased for his wife the kind of elegant haute bourgeoisie jewelry that
women of her class had come to expect. The carved coral jewelry that Doris Duke owned
(Figs. 8, 9 ) most certainly came from her grandmother Holt and dated to the years shortly
after the Civil War when the Holts were still prosperous.3 Such jewelry, invariably of a rich
orange-pink coral mounted on yellow gold and naturalistically carved with leaves, roses,
and other plant motifs, was standard fare for the genteel lady in the middle decades of the
nineteenth century. The coral was carved in Italy and shipped to the United States where
it was retailed throughout the country. Every aspect of the decorative arts of this period
was influenced by French taste, from imported porcelains to the carved rosewood parlor
furniture made famous in the American South by New York manufacturers such as John
Henry Belter and Joseph W. Meeks. Florine Holt’s coral jewelry with its intricate carvings
bears a lineage to these designs. Of special interest is the charming and beautifully crafted
demi-parure of a brooch and earrings in the form of grape clusters (Fig. 8 ). The finely
worked filigreed leaves and the coral grapes represent the plant motif of the typical midVictorian American home. The original presentation case for the set has survived, showing
8
that the brooch-and-earring demi-parure was the most common form for jewelry wearing
in the period. This was not casual jewelry by any means. Florine Holt would have worn this
group of coral jewelry with great pride and only on special occasions.
The word genteel seems strangely archaic today, but gentility was the yardstick by
which all Americans measured themselves and their peers in nineteenth-century America.
To be genteel, one did not need to be rich, although gentility implied a certain financial
comfort and that comfort demanded jewelry as part of the necessary accoutrement. For
more casual, daily wear, Florine Holt might have worn the carved cameo earrings and
brooch encircled with half pearls (Fig. 11). Mimicking the carved cameos and intaglios
of Roman antiquity, such jewelry was commonplace in Europe by the 1820s and spread
throughout the American middle-class market in the 1860s, fueled by the popularity of
the French néo-grec or “new Greek” style of Napoleon III and Empress Eugénie. A more
glamorous and costly example of this fashion is the pair of gold woven-chain bracelets in
the Etruscan style, both of which are engraved Holt (Fig. 12 ). Until the late-nineteenth
century, bracelets were commonly worn in pairs, either as rigid bangles or as link bracelets.
These bracelets are probably American and very likely were made in Newark, New
Jersey, by the firm of W. C. Edge & Sons. William Edge was an English emigrant, who, by
introducing machinery into what was formerly a hand-process, managed to lower the cost
of woven gold, “foxtail” chains from one dollar to two cents per foot.4 These bracelets seem
to take full advantage of the new chain-making technology of the 1880s and, thus, might
date to the years after Thaddeus Holt’s impoverishment and death. In that case, perhaps
they were a gift to Florine Holt from her daughter, Nanaline, who had regained prosperity
through her marriage to William Inman.
Diamonds were very rare in American jewelry before they were discovered in South
Africa in the late 1860s. From that time on, diamonds became—for the first time in human
history—accessible to the middle class. The small diamond set in the center of Florine
Holt’s gold watch from the 1890s (Fig. 10) is typical of the early use of such gems in more
bourgeois jewels.5 This watch also exemplifies the “gendering” of jewelry in the nineteenth
century. Women’s watches became smaller and more ornately decorated, while men’s
watches remained larger and plainer.
To Nanaline Duke, and then to her daughter Doris, this small collection of heirloom
jewels must have evoked poignant memories of a determined, strong-willed woman
who clung to her genteel status through long years of hardship, to finally triumph in
the meteoric rise of her only surviving child to the pinnacle of the Gilded Age society.
However, another small group of modest jewels owned by Doris Duke tells another, even
more poignant tale.
Among all the opulent jewels owned by Nanaline and Doris Duke, there is a small
group of cuff links—set with simple cabochons of amethyst, moonstone, and turquoise.
With them is a simple, gold pocketknife meant to be worn on a watch chain, engraved
“J.B.D.” (Fig. 4). These are the only remaining examples of James Buchanan Duke’s own
jewelry. To Doris Duke, these must have been talismans of the doting father who died when
she was twelve years old. Aside from a gold watch chain, a pocket watch, and a signet ring,
9
he may not have owned much more jewelry than this.6 Men, even major industrialists of
the Gilded Age, were not supposed to wear much jewelry. Even for the richest men, strict
standards of good taste were imposed by social convention, at least for men who cared.7
James B. Duke bought jewelry at Tiffany & Co. in New York and Cartier in Paris,
the same kind of elegant, yet simple, cuff links for daily wear that any other American
businessman in any American city might have owned. Indeed, two of his sets of cuff links
(Figs. 5, 6 ) were made by Carrington & Co., a Newark firm that produced elegant men’s
jewelry for high-end retailers all across the nation, including both Cartier and Tiffany.
Although known for his flamboyant personality, he was never flashy in his personal dress,
preferring, as we shall see, to dress his wife in glittering gems.
A single, diminutive gold bangle, inscribed “MM to DD” was given to Doris Duke as
a toddler (Fig. 3). It is not known who made the presentation, perhaps a godmother. The
dents on it suggest long wear by an active little girl. Such symbolic, simple jewels were
given to babies during the nineteenth century. A gift of a gold bracelet symbolized in its
material the preciousness of the recipient. In spite of high infant mortality in the nineteenth
century, children were seen as new beginnings, and the tradition of baby gifts of silver or
gold became deeply engrained by the early-twentieth century. It is in that light that we
can see the delicate, little, pearl-encrusted gold locket, given to Doris Duke when she
was eleven years old—possibly the last gift of jewelry her father gave her (Fig. 2). It is the
kind of jewelry that any middle-class father might have bought his little girl as she entered
adolescence. But more than that, it is the kind of jewelry that was seen as appropriate for an
eleven-year-old girl. The fact that Doris Duke was worth many millions did not make any
difference. Pearls symbolized purity, so they were what young girls wore—anything more
would have been unseemly. Typically, this locket, plus a seed-pearl barrette and matching
“handy pins” (Fig. 1) used for cuffs and collars, would comprise an entire ensemble of the
kind that Doris Duke would have worn exclusively until she was in her teens.
Two final heirloom jewels symbolize the Gilded Age in a very literal way, one Doris
Duke inherited from her mother, the other from her mother-in-law. Neither of these
pieces were in fashion by the time she came of age, and so she probably kept them as
symbols of powerful society women at the height of their social power. By the turn of the
twentieth century, mesh bags, also known as chain purses or chatelaine purses, were popular
at all economic levels. Base metal chain bags were favored fashion accessories through the
1920s, and silver-plated mesh bags sold for as little as ten dollars in most department stores.
Sterling silver bags were more costly but still common enough for middle-class women.
Solid gold bags, made in Europe as well as in America, were at the upper end of the market.
A simple fourteen-karat gold, mesh bag, which sold for about five hundred dollars in the
early 1900s, was considered appropriate for daytime use. Adding diamonds increased the
dollar value.8 Nanaline Duke’s mesh bag, its filigreed frame glittering with substantial
diamonds (Fig. 13), and used as an evening accessory in the early years of her marriage,
would have been a standard accoutrement for women of her class. By the late 1920s, she
had acquired an even more glamorous, if more discreet, evening bag (Fig. 23).
10
Nanaline Duke’s good friend and social peer, Philadelphia grande dame Eva Cromwell
Stotesbury, owned a vanity case that functioned much like the above-mentioned purse.
This vanity case of engraved green gold is set with sapphires and diamonds and dates from
the years around World War I (Fig. 14). Like Nanaline’s mesh bag, this opulent object was
intended for evening use but was less bulky and was carried suspended from a chatelaine
pin hooked to a belt or waistband. With its superb Louis XVI engraving, it evokes the lavish
world of the belle époque, combining modern convenience with the trappings of aristocracy.
Because it bears Doris Duke Cromwell’s monogram as well as Eva Stotesbury’s own name
and address engraved on the frame, it was, most likely, given to Doris Duke around the time
she married Eva Stotesbury’s son, James Cromwell, in 1935.9
Two elegant pendant watches show a shift in Nanaline Duke’s jewelry style from the
late-nineteenth century to the early-twentieth century. The earlier watch (Fig. 18 ), made by
Longines, retains its original fleur-de-lis chatelaine pin. A bright bleu celeste enamel contrasts
with the rich rococo goldwork of the case, which is further ornamented with a central
motif studded with small, rose-cut diamonds. Nanaline probably acquired this watch in the
1890s when she was still Mrs. William Inman. The later watch, by Tiffany & Co. (Fig. 19 ),
demonstrates the altogether more subtle, but still very French, taste of Mrs. James B. Duke.
The reticulated, knife-edge border of tiny diamonds contrasts with the brilliant green of the
guilloché and transparent enamel border around the dial, which is further enriched with
a blue swag-patterned guilloché and transparent enamel case centered with a cabochon
emerald. As compared with the haute bourgeoisie quality of the Longines watch, the later
Tiffany watch evokes self-consciously, upper-class refinement and subtlety; it represents
Tiffany imitating Cartier imitating Fabergé. Compared with Florine Holt’s gold pendant
watch from a generation before (Fig. 10), it gives mute witness to how far Nanaline Holt’s
star had risen.
Doris Duke inherited all Nanaline’s jewelry after her death in 1962. Although Doris
Duke frequently modified her jewels over time (a habit she apparently learned from her
mother), one of her mother’s greatest jewels survived intact, probably because it was so
strikingly beautiful and well made. Nothing better exemplifies Nanaline Holt Inman’s new
role as the wife of James B. Duke than the diamond festoon necklace Mr. Duke bought his
bride at Cartier in Paris in 1908 (Fig. 15).10 Festoon necklaces were popular in the earlytwentieth century, and nice examples in gold with pearls or amethysts could be purchased
by middle-class women for as little as thirty dollars.11 Nanaline Duke’s festoon of diamonds
and platinum was perhaps among the most opulent of its time in America. Cartier’s Paris
shop charged James B. Duke fr 18,500 for it, after he provided them with most of the
large diamonds.12 The icy-white color scheme of the necklace was the fashion for formal
jewels in this period, when platinum had finally come to dominate diamond jewelry as the
technology to work with this very hard metal was perfected. The classical symmetry and
soft draping of the chains of diamonds embodied the luxurious style of the time, harking
back to the designs of eighteenth-century European nobility. It epitomizes the belle époque
period with its swags, decorated with four-petaled flowers, joined at the center by a vertical
design ending with a pendant suspended from a natural pearl whose color softens the
11
stark whiteness of the diamonds. The large
pearl mounted just above the pear-shaped
diamond pendant might seem odd but, at the
time, pearls of large size were as valuable as
diamonds.
Nanaline Duke would continue to
combine pearls and diamonds throughout her
jewelry-buying life. The next major example of
this in the collection, showing a significant style
shift, is an art deco diadem set with two large
diamonds and a large oriental pearl, which
either she or James B. Duke bought at Cartier
in 1924 for $23,000 (Fig. 16 ). Mikimoto’s pearl
farming process, first perfected in 1905, had not
yet devalued natural Asian pearls, and it was
logical for Nanaline to want to showcase this
one. The geometric design of this bandeauform tiara reflects Eastern European folk design
and shows the continued influence of the
Russian Imperial Court taste, over a decade
after its demise. The more hard-edged look of
this piece stands in strong contrast to the softer
opulence of the earlier necklace.
A Cartier bracelet Nanaline Duke
acquired a few years later (Fig. 17), set with
magnificent diamonds, is a testament to
superb design. Louis Cartier continually
searched for new sources of inspiration for his
jewelry designs. When the rectilinear style of
Doris Duke with an unidentified gentleman. She is wearing
the art deco period became popular, he turned
the Verdura pink topaz and diamond ear clips (Fig. 49).
to the design potential of ancient temples
and pagodas, especially to such elements as
columns and arches on the Taj Mahal and the Pantheon, as well as abstract patterns formed
by the stepped outlines found on ancient structures such as Babylonian ziggurats or Mayan
temples. The architectonic possibilities of these shapes conformed to the emerging new
style and offered a tableau for the new diamond cuts, including the baguette cut that
Cartier introduced in 1912. This bracelet bears witness to their fine design. One marquisecut and four pear-shaped diamonds counterbalance the angularity of the baguette-cut
diamonds and serve the double function of softening the overall appearance while
highlighting the striking effect of the columnlike central links. This design is dictated by the
shape of the diamonds in much the same way that jewelry from the 1950s was conceived
with no visible mounting, letting gemstones create the design.
12
A pair of bracelets purchased by Nanaline Duke, and later worn by her daughter, also
presents a mixture of stylistic generations (Fig. 22). The soft graduated strands of fine pearls
evoke the fashion for multistrand pearl dog collars and bracelets in the early-twentieth century.
The drum-shaped clasps, set with baguette diamonds, however, are pure modernist design.
Doris Duke considered them up-to-date enough to wear—together on one wrist, as was the
1930s fashion—when she was photographed by the celebrated Cecil Beaton (see page 46).
Nanaline Duke owned two important rings, both symbols of her new standing as Mrs.
James B. Duke, which provide further proof of her love of large gemstones. The compressed
globe of the large oriental pearl seen in one ring (Fig. 21) is recognizable in her 1926
portrait (see page 34). The pearl’s large size (nine millimeters) and exotic, yet perfect, shape
would have made it especially valuable in its day. By the same token, the monumental
emerald-cut diamond from Tiffany’s, nearly twenty carats in weight, speaks of a new, more
hard-edged glamour (Fig. 20).
As the decades progressed, so did Nanaline Duke’s taste in jewelry. Her Tiffany pendant
watch and the diamond-mounted gold mesh purse represent styles from the turn of the
century. But, styles changed and so did her preferences. Two pieces she added to her collection
continued to document her shifting taste. James Buchanan Duke bought Nanaline a
wristwatch with a pearl bracelet as a Christmas present in 1922 from Charlton & Co., in New
York City, a prominent American jeweler. In 1935, Nanaline instructed Cartier to remake
it with a diamond bracelet but to keep the original Charlton dial (Fig. 27).13 Wristwatches
became popular after World War I, when men wore small watches strapped to their wrists
in battle. The bracelet watch for women existed in the nineteenth century but did not gain
broad favor until the late 1910s. For ladies of Nanaline Duke’s age (she turned forty-eight
in 1919), wristwatches did not really catch on until after World War I. Another piece in her
collection, the ruby and diamond lapel watch (Fig. 24), is a rare example of a watch from the
1920s. In contrast, the sautoir watch, worn on a long chain around the neck, was offered by just
about every retail jeweler.14
An elegant evening bag from Cartier exemplifies the monochromatic, geometric, art
deco style of the early 1930s (Fig. 23). The design is based on Chinese motifs, an inspiration
that is evident in Cartier’s jewelry from this period. Contrasted with the solid gold mesh
and large diamonds of Nanaline Duke’s earlier purse, this one, while probably far more
costly, is subtle and discreet.
Two more bracelets owned and worn by Nanaline Duke underline her generation’s
love of softer jewelry styles well into the 1920s. Like the pair of bracelets in Figure 22 with
the drum-form clasps, the intricate, Middle Eastern latticework of pearls on a bracelet
(Fig. 29 ) contrasts with the complex geometry of the diamond plaque at its center. Cartier’s
extensive work for the nobility of India might have influenced the design of this piece.
Certainly Nanaline’s love of large stones influenced the acquisition of the only large colored
stone in her collection—a 35.54 carat Ceylon sapphire, set in a bracelet (Fig. 30) of pearl
strands that James B. Duke bought for her from Cartier in 1925. Ceylon has produced fine
sapphires for at least twenty-five hundred years, but this source, according to Benjamin
Zucker in Gems and Jewels, “….is not as plentiful as before.” 15 Today, it is rare to find a
13
stone with the quality of the sapphire in this bracelet, precisely the type of stone that Louis
Cartier would have sought for his jewelry designs. Cartier’s fame for colored stones in the
1920s is evident only in this single piece in Nanaline’s collection. Her daughter, on the
other hand, would glory in colored stones throughout her own jewelry-collecting lifetime.
It is hard to imagine why Nanaline purchased the bracelet in Figure 28 from Cartier
in 1939. It is an elegant and handsome piece, architectonic in its late art deco modernism,
massive and tailored in its styling. It does not seem like the sort of jewel a woman nearing
seventy would have purchased. And yet Nanaline owned it until her death in 1962. Perhaps
its novelty intrigued her, or maybe it reminded her of the heavy, hinged gold bangles of her
own mother’s mid-Victorian youth in Macon, Georgia. Whatever her reasons for buying it,
it seems oddly out of harmony with the rest of her jewelry.
Two pairs of clips—one of ear clips and one of dress clips—also offer a final insight
into Nanaline Duke’s evolving taste. The Egyptian lotus-form diamond ear clips from 1933,
purchased at Cartier by Nanaline, hug the ear—the scroll fitting neatly over the lobe—in
a most flattering fashion (Fig. 26 ). These ear clips are in keeping with the all-white look of
jewelry at the end of the 1920s and the beginning of the 1930s. One of the last pieces of
jewelry from Nanaline’s collection—a pair of leaf-form diamond dress clips ornamented
with rosettes of sapphires (Fig. 25) —evoke the romantic naturalism of the nineteenth
century. Made by an unknown jeweler in New York in the early 1940s, these clips illustrate
the rise of naturalism in jewelry in this decade. Doris Duke’s own jewelry would also show
this influence. To Nanaline, however, these clips would have reminded her of Victorian
flower-form jewels, a familiar landmark in a world that had changed irrevocably from the
one she entered as Mrs. James B. Duke in 1907.
When Doris Duke began to buy jewelry, her taste favored the more classical jewels
from the 1930s. Unlike her mother, she did not go for the big gems. Even at the outset, her
style was geared more towards design rather than the intrinsic value of the “big rocks.” This
early preference presaged her choice of jewelry for the rest of her life.
Perhaps being the richest woman in the world meant she did not have to impress
others. For most of her life, she was hounded by the press, who were eager to take a
photograph of her no matter what the occasion. She shunned publicity; even when her
husband, James Cromwell, was seeking a political position, she avoided the press. As a
child and young adult, since there had been many kidnapping threats, she never went out
in public without a bodyguard. This emphasis on security caused her to travel incognito,
to make airplane reservations under an assumed name, or to arrive at the airport at the
last minute so no one would know beforehand that she was flying. This need for privacy
influenced the way she lived and carried over to the jewelry she purchased.
Doris Duke patronized the foremost jewelry maisons, such as Cartier and Van Cleef
& Arpels, as well as rising designers such as Paul Flato, Fulco di Verdura, Seaman Schepps,
and David Webb, all of New York City. She often instructed them to make new jewels out
of old ones, a custom she would have learned from her mother who was fond of having
old jewels refashioned into updated styles, retaining the gemstones but getting rid of the
mountings. Alas, the Duke women were not the only ones to do this, a major reason why
14
so many important gemstone jewels from past
periods no longer exist.
In the early 1930s, when Doris Duke began
buying her own jewelry, she was still under the
influence of her mother, shopping at the same
salons and choosing jewelry that followed the
conservative taste of the period. The diamonds
in her jewelry tended to be shaped in simple
geometric cuts where the stones dictate the design
but do not overwhelm. The pair of bracelets in
Figure 35 feature two pavé-set diamond buckle
motifs with circular, lozenge, marquise, and
baguette-cut diamonds. The diamonds are set in
such a way that the bracelets are flexible, feeling
almost like a piece of fabric. These bracelets
can be joined to form a choker necklace, a
popular feature in the early 1930s, which would
have accessorized the new fashions. In place of
the flapper image of short skirts and plunging
necklines of the mid-1920s, there was a shift to
a more traditional silhouette through figureslimming clothes in the 1930s. The stock market
Doris Duke on her wedding day, September 1, 1947,
crash of 1929 and the ensuing Great Depression
when she married Porfirio Rubirosa. She is wearing the
marked the end of an era and the temporary end
diamond and yellow gold choker (Fig. 68 ).
of prosperity. Paradoxically, as day clothes became
more conservative in design, evening dresses were the most elegant of the century. This
choker/necklace would have gracefully encircled the neck of the young Doris Duke at a
chic evening engagement.
Although most of the jewelry Doris Duke bought in the 1930s is monochromatic, she
did buy a few pieces with emeralds.Yet, even when she selected fine jewelry with important
gem material, it was the color and not the size that mattered to her. The two emerald bead
necklaces are such examples (Figs. 31, 32). The emeralds are fine specimens, strung simply
like pearls; their monetary value resides in the quality of the stones. She would have worn
them at the collar of a tailored suit, where they would have attracted the attention of both
the discerning gem connoisseur and the untutored person who would not know their true
worth. Besides valuing their superb color, Miss Duke also would have enjoyed them because
emerald was the stone most associated with India.16
Cartier capitalized on the emerald’s popularity in India, bringing back cabochon emeralds
or emeralds engraved with floral designs that they set into imaginative jewels. The clip brooch
and bracelet in Figures 33 and 34 (the former was remade in 1954 from an earlier design) that
Cartier had created for Doris Duke are good examples. Cabochon emeralds are arranged
within the central plaque; the Indian theme is evident in the lotus design of the clip brooch.
15
The Eastern theme is also seen on the vanity case in Figure 41. In the days of glamour,
when the fashionable lady went out in the evening, she deemed herself undressed if she
was without her requisite cosmetic articles, usually consolidated within an exquisitely
designed vanity case. According to Sylvie Raulet, “…the most trivial item….offered a
delightful pretext for combining the richest materials in the creation of a unique work
of art—a work which could compete with the rarest pieces of the Renaissance and the
eighteenth century.”17 The vanity case, based on the oriental inro, was comprised of several
compartments holding essential items such as a compact, lipstick, perfume flask, and comb.
The Cartier vanity case (Fig. 41) in the Duke collection is decorated with lapis lazuli and
colored gemstones with a central floral Indian motif reminiscent of an oriental carpet, a
true work of art in miniature form.
Doris Duke married James Cromwell on February 13, 1935. They spent most of that year
on their honeymoon, traveling to India, where she began her lifelong love affair with the arts
of the East. The couple bought prodigiously: carpets, ivory carvings, tiles, jade, bronze statuary,
clothing, and jewelry. On their return trip, they stopped in Hawaii where a year later Doris
Duke bought a plot of land near Diamond Head for her home, Shangri La. While overseeing
construction of the estate, she became friends with Sam Kahanamoku, a swimming champion
who, at some point, gave her a bracelet with his swimming medals (Fig. 77).
Jewelry of the 1930s took on a softer look. Although straight geometric lines continued
to dominate, curves were introduced and overall shapes became rounder. In response, Doris
Duke had some of her outdated jewelry adapted into the new forms. From a clip brooch/
hair barrette, she had Cartier create the pair of hair slides in Figure 40 in simple, half-moon
shapes set with circular and baguette-cut diamonds. These hair slides are the type of jewelry
she favored in the 1930s—nothing too ostentatious, nothing too bold. This also holds true
for her earrings. In contrast to the long, dangling style from the art deco period, earrings
now hugged the ear lobe. Another interesting piece of jewelry designed by Cartier is
the pair of ear pendants in Figure 38. These elegant but understated jewels are beautifully
conceived incorporating briolette diamonds. Most available reference material on diamonds
agrees on one point about briolettes: they are a very rare form of cutting. A briolette is a
pear or drop-shaped diamond whose surface is entirely covered with triangular facets. It is
the oldest form of symmetrical diamond cutting, dating to the seventeenth century when
advancements in optics opened the door to a way of faceting diamonds to allow greater
light refraction. Over the ensuing centuries, this type of diamond cut has been the preferred
choice for royal jewels.
Along with wide bracelets, double-clip brooches became a staple of the decade. They
could be worn clipped to lapels or hats, or hooked together and worn as one brooch. The
clip brooches in Figure 37 exemplify this flexibility of use. Convertible jewelry that could
function in many ways was popular throughout the 1930s, perhaps in response to the Great
Depression and the need to economize evident in all strata of society. By the 1940s, the
economy was beginning to rebound. During the war, many women took over the jobs
of men serving abroad; even Doris Duke served as a wartime International News Service
correspondent. New challenges for women necessitated a new wardrobe. Large shoulder
16
pads lent an air of the military to jackets, coats, and dresses, and “separates,” ensembles of
interchangeable skirts and blouses, were introduced. After the war, Christian Dior’s “New
Look” brought a softer silhouette to the figure. Jewelry followed the new fashion trends
with designs evolving into three-dimensional configurations with scrolls, volutes, domes,
and rectangles. Curves were back, and nowhere is this more evident than in the double-clip
brooch (Fig. 36 ) by Paul Flato. Streams of baguette-cut diamond, ribbon-like elements flow
from the center. Drama had returned to jewelry design.
During the war years, it was American, rather than European, fashion designers who
dictated what American women would wear. This was indeed true of jewelry designers. Up
until the late 1930s, jewelry design in America had followed the dictates of European styles.
Then, as a result of the Depression, many jewelers were forced to close their doors. Those who
survived, or even flourished, were those who created innovative concepts and designs. Trabert
& Hoeffer, Inc.– Mauboussin introduced the “Reflections” line whereby clients could design
their own jewelry using parts made from castings. They, along with Paul Flato, catered to an
emerging group of stage and screen stars avidly seeking the latest designs. Fashion magazines
such as Vogue and Harper’s Bazaar were quick to illustrate the latest styles.
In the midst of the hard times, an invigorated style emerged reflecting developments in
the fine and decorative arts, where machine-age concepts and a return to naturalism were
occurring simultaneously. The latter was fostered by several new designers not connected
with the main jewelry houses. One of the earliest and most innovative of these designers
was Fulco di Verdura who, after working with Paul Flato, opened his own business in 1939.
To him, design was always paramount. He took simple, universal images and turned them
into playful, imaginative jewels. For the brooch in Figure 70, he borrowed the Indian head
on the reverse of the five-cent piece, using a baroque pearl for the feathered headdress.
This design is reminiscent of George Catlin’s paintings and drawings of American Indians
from the nineteenth century.18 In the early 1940s,Verdura created a series of brooches made
out of painted ivory chessmen from India (Fig. 75). He took these amusing figures and
turned them into small works of art adorned with precious gemstones and pearls.19 These
chessmen were not like anything that any other jeweler was making in the early 1940s.
Instead, the chessmen were a refreshing look at jewelry design, based not on the value of
the gem material but on creativity. Verdura was not afraid to stretch beyond traditional
parameters to find a new, exciting vernacular, which was eagerly embraced by his clients.
The chessmen must have appealed to Doris Duke, whose artistic eye had been honed by
her collecting of Eastern artifacts and, in particular, by her strong love of India.
Doris Duke purchased a crossover necklace from Verdura (Fig. 50 ) that, although using
traditional jewelry materials, was created in an innovative manner. Adorned with citrines
attached to dangling wires, the necklace swoops around the neck in a manner similar to the
diamond-set “Comet” necklace that Coco Chanel created in 1932 or the vine necklace by
Paul Flato.20 Verdura, who had worked for both Chanel and Flato, would have known this
style. One can imagine Miss Duke carrying the gem-set vanity, also by Verdura (Fig. 63), that
coordinates with this necklace.
17
In the 1960s, Doris Duke added a suite of pink topaz and diamonds by Verdura to her
jewelry collection (Fig. 49). The necklace is formed as a circlet surrounding the neck from
which pink topaz drops are suspended. Ear pendants and a coordinating bracelet complete
the suite. She probably selected this jewelry as an appropriate complement to a dress or
suit. Throughout her life, Doris Duke frequented Verdura’s salon. Ward Landrigan, who
purchased the company in 1985, remembers her buying cuff links for gifts. As he said, “She
knew what she wanted and would study a piece intently. But, she was very specific…for
example, she liked blue.”21
Blue is the dominant color of the Seaman Schepps three-piece ensemble (Figs. 60, 61,
62) set with cabochon sapphires. Schepps, a talented jeweler who had opened for business
in the 1920s, was a victim of the stock market crash in 1929 and was forced to close his
shop on Sixth Avenue in New York City. Realizing that only new, innovative jewelry was
saleable, he reinvented himself, opening a shop a few years later that offered only unique
designs. He is credited as one of the designers to introduce whimsy back into jewelry
design by incorporating man-made materials in combination with precious and semiprecious gemstones. The bracelet of this set (each piece was purchased at different times)
is composed of five rows of cabochon sapphires, each stone a different size to give interest
to the piece. The clasp is disguised in a buckle-type attachment decorated with engraved
sapphires and set with diamonds and other gemstones that recalls the “fruit salad” bracelets
created by Cartier in the late 1920s.22 The bunch-of-grapes clip brooch (Fig. 60) is large in
scale but very wearable. In it Schepps made each cabochon sapphire grape a different shade
of blue, just as on a real bunch of grapes—almost inviting one to pluck a grape to eat!
The 1950s was a time of affluence in America, similar to the late 1990s, in which this
country sustained an extended period of growth when large segments of the population
enjoyed the benefits of wealth. Fine jewelry was no longer the province of the rich. The
middle class could now afford precious stone jewelry and desired to emulate such legendary
screen stars as Grace Kelly, whose wedding to Prince Rainier III of Monaco on April 19,
1957, was an event that captivated the world. Jewelry of the 1950s evolved from the bold
look of the previous decade into sumptuous gem-set creations. No longer would settings
dominate a piece of jewelry; gemstones now became the focal point.
The jeweler who most epitomized this new direction was David Webb. Following in
the footsteps of Flato,Verdura, and Schepps, he created bold, sculptural jewels that came to
symbolize the essence of the modern woman in the second half of the twentieth century,
when women began to assume a more dominant role in the work force and wanted jewels
to reflect who and what they were.
Doris Duke was in her early fifties when she began buying jewelry from David Webb.
Working closely with him, she was able to take advantage of his bold and colorful use of
stones to achieve designs emphasizing the overall distinctiveness and elegance that suited
her taste and lifestyle. When she bought from Webb, she wanted not just a necklace but
also coordinating earrings. Ruby beads, accented with pearls, form a fringe necklace (Fig.
52), inspired by Eastern examples; another necklace is made of engraved fluted emerald
beads, which could take months to make (Fig. 47). This necklace bears a relationship to the
18
multistrand necklaces favored by Indian maharajahs. Webb designed ear pendant drops (Figs.
48, 51) for both necklaces that could be suspended from a pair of diamond-set scroll earrings
(Fig. 56 ). Opals with crystal spacers highlight another necklace formed of two strands and it,
like the above mentioned necklaces, has a matching pair of ear pendants (Figs. 53, 54). The
turquoise, sapphire, and diamond suite consists of a necklace and bracelet that Miss Duke
purchased in 1965 (Figs. 44, 46 ). According to Stanley Silberstein at David Webb, Inc., “The
necklace was a private commission for Miss Duke.”23 Four years later, she returned to Webb
to buy ear clips with the same stones, this time set in all platinum (Fig. 45). Perhaps the
most spectacular David Webb jewel in Doris Duke’s collection is a diamond brooch, made
with pear-shaped diamonds from a bracelet that her mother had given to her (Fig. 55).
This floral spray bears similarities to the jewelry the Parisian jeweler, Massim, designed in
the 1850s with mountings with waterfall, or pampille, settings in which diamonds are set on
articulated wires that quiver when worn. It was designed with three stems that curl upwards,
evolving into three leaves from which either pear- or marquise-cut diamonds are suspended.
The theme of movement is provided both in the design of the gracefully arched stems and
leaves that direct the eye to the dangling diamonds, as well as in the actual movement of
the hanging diamonds themselves. Attention has been paid to details such as the leaves,
where circular-cut diamonds decorate each leaf while baguette-cut diamonds delineate the
center vein. It is truly a spectacular jewel, in keeping with the splendid diamond jewelry her
mother owned.
Another spectacular jewel acquired by Doris Duke is a one-of-a-kind pair of diamond,
pearl, and baroque pearl ear pendants measuring 31⁄2 inches in length (Fig. 69 ). With the
diamond-set rosettes and dangling elements, they are similar in design to Indian jewelry,
like many other pieces in her collection. Miss Duke also owned a pair of costume jewelry
ear pendants that are almost identical to this pair. In fact in photographs of her, it is hard to
distinguish which pair she is wearing.
In contrast to the Webb ear pendants, Doris Duke owned two pairs by Van Cleef &
Arpels that clip onto the ear lobe without any dangling elements. In one, diamonds are
patterned in the guise of snowflakes (Fig. 66 ); the other features scrolls set with aquamarines
and diamonds (Fig. 67). Both are easy to wear during the day or into the evening. They
both recall her mother’s Cartier scroll ear clips from 1933 (Fig. 26 ). She also owned a suite
of “Hawaii” flower jewelry by Van Cleef & Arpels (Fig. 73). It is made with clusters of
flowers consisting of diamond centers and alternating sapphire and ruby petals, arranged in
dome-like constructions.
The last piece of Western jewelry that we know Doris Duke bought for herself is the
pair of Cartier emerald-bead ear clips (Fig. 64) she purchased at auction in 1991, just two
years before her death. When one looks at these jewels, one can see why she would want
them: set with emeralds, the stone she most associated with India, in the shape of leaves,
a reference to nature, they are, like all Cartier jewelry, superbly crafted. These ear clips
epitomize both her taste in jewelry and her lifelong love affair with the arts of the East.
19
Doris Duke’s taste for jewels from India dates to 1935, the year she took her honeymoon
trip around the world with Jimmy Cromwell. At that time, the Indian subcontinent was still
the “jewel in the crown”—the crown being, of course, the British Empire. India was divided
into some six hundred autonomous princely states and territories. The glory days of the
Mogul empire in the north and west were long gone, but tattered remnants remained, with
petty kings and nobles living out their days organizing tiger hunts and other amusements. In
the capital city, Delhi, the newly married Cromwells were entertained by the viceroy, Lord
Willingdon, and the field marshall, Philip Chetwode.24 It is likely that they were treated to
some glittering dinner parties in settings that would have seemed like a fantastic dream in
comparison to the luxurious but staid environment they had come from. Even though all
the warning signs of change were there, the British Empire in India was still keeping up
appearances, maintained by thousands of servants, cooks, and gardeners. Members of the
Indian elite would have mixed with the British upper echelon at parties but usually without
their wives or other female members of their households.
A required stop on the itinerary of all tourists to India in 1935 was, as is now, the Taj
Mahal in Agra. Built by the fifth Mogul emperor, Shah Jahan, as a tomb for his beloved wife,
Mumtaz, it was supposed to be mirrored by an identical building in black marble on the
opposite riverbank, but that never came to pass (this story may be a romantic myth). It is likely
that, if the stories of Doris Duke declaring that she wanted a building like the Taj Mahal are
true, she already had an eye for the kind of architecture and art that she later collected in such
abundance, including jewelry. She hired an architect in Delhi to design doors and windows
to be fabricated and inlaid with jade, agate, malachite, lapis lazuli, and mother of pearl by
craftsmen in Agra, to be shipped later to America.25 Local craftsmen, descendents of the same
families that created the inlaid stonework on the Taj, had fallen on hard times as patronage
from the old families was no longer there. The princely states in pre-independence India still
supported artists and craftsmen to some degree, even into the 1930s, but industrialization had
eaten into the livelihoods of many craft professions. Under these circumstances, a commission
from a wealthy American must have been very well received.
To understand the jewelry from India that Doris Duke collected, it is important to
have some knowledge of the history of the country and how jewelry was viewed within
the culture of the land and to understand the forms and styles that had been popular for
many centuries. In many cases, these styles are vastly different from Western designs and are,
therefore, foreign to our Western sensibilities. The reign of Shah Jahan and the Taj Mahal in
the seventeenth century came at the apex of the Mogul empire, when its vast accumulated
wealth was spent on creating works of art in every medium. Even their lethal hunting daggers
and swords for warfare were exquisitely crafted with jade handles inlaid with rubies and
emeralds and with scabbards covered with silk and gold velvet. Nothing in daily use in the
Mogul court was left unadorned, and the men were as jeweled and perfumed as the women.
Every year on his birthday, Emperor Aurangzeb, the son of Shah Jahan, was weighed
against gold, silver, textiles, and other valuables from the Treasure, which were then given
to charity. After the ceremony, the guests—including officials, family members, and
nobles—gave the Emperor gifts, which were then recorded by scribes. In October 1665,
20
he received diamonds, rubies, emeralds, pearls, gold, silver, carpets, brocades, elephants, and
horses, probably worth many times more than what he had given away to charity.26 This
custom persisted until at least 1937, two years after the Cromwells’ honeymoon trip, when
the Maharajah of Bikaner was weighed in gold ingots on the fiftieth anniversary of his rule,
and the equivalent amount in cash was distributed to charity.27
Work in metal, stone work, textiles and, above all, jewelry, was exquisite. Women of the
Mogul courts in India, roughly from the sixteenth to the nineteenth centuries, were treated
like exotic imprisoned birds, not allowed the freedom to do much besides compete with each
other in the accumulation of jewelry and clothing purchased with the cash allotments they
received. A pleasing appearance was rewarded with more gifts of jewels as a sign of approval
(in a limited sense not unlike the milieu in which Doris Duke may have been raised).28
Intrigue ruled in the women’s quarters, or zenana, where competition was fierce.
As a result, craftsmen tried to outdo each other in creating gilding for the already lovely
ladies. Niccolao Manucci, a Venetian who spent many years in India in the last half of the
seventeenth century and early part of the eighteenth, and was allowed access to the zenana
to administer medical aid, wrote quite detailed descriptions of the women’s jewelry.29
A woman would have her nose pierced with a gold hoop strung with pearls, possibly a
smaller ring studded with gems, or as a variation a gold stud. A pendant would be worn
on the forehead, attached by bands of pearls or gold chains. There were many variations
of earrings, some so long that they had to be attached to the hair or to a neckband to
relieve the weight. Upper arms would have armlets, and lower arms and wrists could have
multiple bracelets and bangles of various widths. As Manucci recounts, “On their fingers
are rich rings, and on the right thumb there is always a ring, where, in place of a stone,
there is mounted a little round mirror, having pearls around it. This mirror they use to look
at themselves, an act of which they are very fond, at any and every moment.”30 In presentday India, such adornments are still seen during weddings, when borrowed finery or family
jewels are brought out for the wedding party.
In India, Doris Duke was certainly exposed to abundant local history and folklore, but
as she did in her own country, she exercised her own preferences for jewelry and frequently
altered pieces to suit her looks and style. A good example is the centerpiece of her Indian
jewel collection (Fig. 80), a bib necklace that she had had adapted from a necklace, a
pendant clip, and earrings she bought at auction in 1971; the pieces had originally been
made in India for the noted Polish soprano, Ganna Walska.31 The enormous diamonds boast
their Indian heritage within a distinctly Western design.
For Western women, bracelets are probably the most easily wearable items of Indian
jewelry, and Miss Duke acquired some wonderful examples. In a pair of delicate bracelets
(Fig. 84), rubies are made to look like rose petals, each ruby pierced on the unseen, overlapped
edge and threaded with a wire which is then embedded in lac, a natural resin of animal origin,
to hold it in place.32 Kara (Fig. 83) is a typical enameled bangle bracelet from Jaipur with
elephant head protome terminals. The bracelet opens by means of a tiny screw set to the side
of the animal head. This style of bracelet, with animal heads guarding the opening, is believed
to have originated in the Near East and spread to India in the third century A.D. The design,
21
still popular in India, became fashionable in the West during the art deco period after Cartier
introduced it during the 1920s.33 The animal heads can also take the form of parrots, tigers,
snakes, dragons, and makaras, or creatures from Hindu mythology.34
During the late 1960s and early 1970s, when flamboyant “ethnic chic” clothing spread
from the so-called “hippie revolution” all the way to the far reaches of Newport society,
Indian jewelry fit perfectly with the party clothes of the day. The lovely armlets, or bazuband
(Fig. 85), which might have looked quite outrageous if worn with a 1950s gown, would
have been worn with perfect aplomb in the early 1970s. These are examples of the most
finely worked type of armlet, interlocking units set with diamonds and enameled on the
reverse side with tiny flowers. The anklets (Fig. 104) of diamonds set with gold, along with
these armlets, would only have been worn by women of great privilege, if not royalty. For a
less ostentatious type of armlet, the charming pair with seed pearl bracelets (Fig. 98 ) bears a
resemblance to granulated gold jewelry of a similar form.
Hands were another area of the body decorated in every possible manner in India. The
pair of hand ornaments (Fig. 95), called hathphul, or “hand-flower,” were not just placed on
bare hands but were complemented by floral mehndi (henna) designs covering the palms
and fingers (as well as the soles of the feet).
In a favored technique peculiar to Indian jewelry,35 used in many of the pieces in this
collection, stones are set in a purified gold ground, called kundan, which requires heating
beaten strips of gold foil and then pressing them around the stones. Kundan was used in the
spectacular arya (necklace) made in Bikaner, in the western edge of the Great Indian Desert
(Fig. 89). The arya is one of the most complex constructions in Indian traditional jewelry.36
Kundan was also used in many of Doris Duke’s other pieces, such as an armlet from Jaipur set
with multicolored stones (Fig. 93) and a pair of ruby and diamond bangles (Fig. 82).
A very easy piece for Doris Duke to wear would have been the complex and lovely
diamond, pearl, and sapphire gold necklace with polychrome enamel on the reverse and
edged with a fringe of tiny pearls (Fig. 88 ). This piece matched her coloring preference in a
way that ruby and emerald pieces would not.
Belts, either rigid or in sections, were another part of the traditional north Indian court
costume. The belt ( kamarband, from which comes cummerbund) from Jaipur (Fig. 99 ) is
made of white sapphires set into gold with polychrome enamel on the reverse.
Indian earrings were often so long that they covered the entire side of the head and
neck, fastening onto the hair under a veil. Two examples of these (Figs. 91, 92) are made in a
style still worn by Indian brides.
A few pieces from Doris Duke’s collection of Indian jewelry do not belong to the
north Indian jewelry tradition. One of these is a magnificent necklace from Madras
(Fig. 100), featuring a typically south Indian design with small cabochon-cut rubies
probably from Burma, where they occur in gem-bearing gravel of alluvial deposits. Indian
craftsmen try to preserve the maximum size of these gems, which are naturally rather small
and reasonable in cost.37
Another south Indian piece is the hair ornament in the form of a nagaraja, or snakeking (Fig. 101), meant to be fastened at the nape of the neck. A long, attached jeweled piece
22
ending in tassels—missing from this example—would conceal the wearer’s braid of hair.
Typically, this ornament would be worn by brides or by Bharata-natyam dancers. For the
latter, the long jeweled braid would sway as they danced.38 Other ornaments depicting the
sun and the moon would be fastened higher up on the back of the head. A five-headed
nagaraja is sometimes depicted hovering over the head of Goddess Durga as a protector, so
this tradition may derive from that source.39
The Thai pieces from the Duke collection provide interesting contrasts to her Indian
jewelry. Doris Duke loved Thai art and architecture, and indeed she wanted to build an
entire Thai village in Hawaii. However, when appropriate land could not be obtained for
it there, she had the village sent to Duke Farms, her Hillsborough, New Jersey, estate. The
Thai belt buckle of gold and diamonds (Figs. 105, 106 ) seems more refined and delicate in
comparison with the somewhat earthier Indian pieces. Comparing the Indian necklace of
rubies and diamonds (Fig. 87) to the Thai necklace of synthetic rubies and silver gilt (Fig.
109 ) gives one a sense of the difference in approach between the two cultures.
The foregoing discussion attempts to present the Doris Duke jewelry collection within
the context of her family background and her own development as an avid collector.
Hopefully, this account has succeeded in showing that this collection is much more than
an assemblage of beautiful, expensive pieces that a person of refined tastes and almost
unlimited resources accumulated during her long life. Two important aspects make this
collection unique and immensely valuable. Firstly, it includes jewelry purchased during
almost every period critical to the development of the American jewelry industry, starting
from the emergence of the mass market for jewelry in the nineteenth century and spanning
through several critical phases of its subsequent evolution to a position of leadership in the
twentieth century. At the same time, because of Doris Duke’s strong interest in the arts from
the East, the collection provides an excellent perspective on aesthetic values and techniques
predominant in India and other Eastern countries, as well as a firsthand view of possibilities
for a successful marriage of Eastern and Western jewelry materials and designs. And, of course,
guided by her unerring eye, viewing the collection is an undeniable aesthetic delight.
23
End Notes
1.
Ulysses Grant Dietz, “The Glitter & The Gold: Fashioning America’s Jewelry,” in The Glitter & The Gold: Fashioning
America’s Jewelry (Newark: The Newark Museum, 1997), p. 11.
2.
By 1869, there were 1,493 people working full time in the jewelry industry in Newark. See also Ulysses Dietz,
“The Glitter & The Gold,” p. 15.
3.
It is unlikely that any of this early jewelry belonged to a Duke. Washington Duke, Doris Duke’s paternal grandfather,
was twice widowed by the end of the Civil War. Moreover, the Dukes were smalltime, rural farmers—respectable,
but relatively poor. It was probably not until James B. Duke’s generation that Duke women would own fine
jewelry. For illustration of other examples of coral jewelry, see Martha Gandy Fales, Jewelry in America 1600-1900,
(Woodbridge, Suffolk: Antique Collector’s Club, 1995), pp. 244-45.
4.
Janet Zapata, “The Names Behind the Jewelry,” in The Glitter & The Gold, p. 169.
5.
Ferdinand Herpers of Newark, New Jersey, patented the first pronged setting for diamonds in 1872, just one year
after the Kimberly Pipe was discovered. See Ulysses Dietz, The Glitter & The Gold, p. 17.
6.
There is a dress set of mother of pearl with small diamonds (Fig. 111) that was most likely Mr. Duke’s and a plain
gold pocket watch that belonged to Doris Duke’s half-brother, Walker Inman (Fig. 120).
7.
Jenna Weissman Joselit, “Jewelry: The Natural Gift,” in The Glitter & The Gold, p. 22, fig. 13.
8.
Dietz, “Producing What America Wanted: Jewelry from Newark’s Workshops,” in The Glitter & The Gold, p. 89.
9.
According to Elizabeth Steinberg, archivist, Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, this piece was listed in Nanaline
Duke’s estate appraisal in 1962. This contradicts the evidence offered by the piece itself and suggests the possibility
that Doris Duke gave it to her mother after her divorce from Cromwell in 1943.
10. The original invoice is in the Duke University Rare Book, Manuscript, and Special Collections Library.
11. Dietz, The Glitter & The Gold, p. 66.
12. James B. Duke bought another item which, also, is recorded on the same invoice as the diamond necklace.
He purchased a tiara (probably dismantled at a later date) that could convert into a corsage ornament and
shoulder brooch. Set with seven large pear-shaped diamonds, that piece cost James B. Duke fr 110,000;
Cartier provided all of the stones. A copy of this invoice is located in the Duke University Rare Book, Manuscript,
and Special Collections Library.
13. We would like to thank Bonnie Selfe at Cartier for noticing that the bracelet on this watch is by Cartier and
not by the maker on the dial, Charlton & Co.
14. Newark’s Henry Blank & Co. provided such diamond-studded sautoir and lapel watches for both Tiffany and Cartier
at this period. For an illustration of a sautoir watch from an unknown maker from the early 1920s, see Janet Zapata,
“Jewelry at the Toledo Museum of Art,” The Magazine Antiques, vol. CLVIII (October 2000): p. 511.
15. Quoted in Benjamin Zucker, Gems and Jewels: A Connoisseur’s Guide (New York: Thames & Hudson, 1987), p. 33.
16. Even though the finest emeralds come from the mines in Colombia, they are commonly associated with India.
The maharajahs, fascinated with the stone, bought the rarest and best examples. In the nineteenth century,
Westerners purchased emeralds that had been exported to India.
17. Quoted in Sylvie Raulet, Art Deco Jewelry, (New York: Rizzoli International Publications, Inc., 1985), p. 271.
18. These paintings served as inspiration for many designers such as Charles Grosjean at Tiffany & Co., who designed
a flatware set for William Randolph Hearst with dancing Indians on the handle. For illustration, see William P.
Hood, Jr. with Roslyn Berlin and Edward Wawrynek, Tiffany Silver Flatware 1845-1905: When Dining Was an Art
(Woodbridge, Suffolk: Antique Collectors Club, 1999), pp. 258-261.
19. When the chessmen were first offered, they sold out quickly, bought by prominent society ladies. For more
information and illustrations of other examples, see Patricia Corbett, Verdura The Life and Work of a Master Jeweler
(New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 2002), pp. 110-111.
20. For illustration of the necklace by Coco Chanel, see Patrick Mauriés, Jewelry by Chanel (Boston, Toronto, London:
Little, Brown and Company, 1993), cover illustration. For illustration of vine necklace by Paul Flato, owned by Lily
Pons, see Penny Proddow, Debra Healy and Marion Fasel, Hollywood Jewels Movies-Jewelry-Stars (New York; Harry
N. Abrams 1992), p. 115.
24
21. Janet Zapata telephone conversation with Ward Landrigan, February 2003.
22. Around 1924, Cartier introduced a line of jewelry known as “tutti fruiti” or “fruit salad.” The design was based on
the Chinese continuous vine with a diamond-stem from which “grew” engraved rubies, sapphires and emerald
leaves. For illustration, see Judy Rudoe, Cartier 1900 -1939 (New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc. and Metropolitan
Museum of Art, 1997), p. 226-227.
23. Janet Zapata telephone conversation with Stanley Silberstein, David Webb, Inc., February 2003
24. Stephanie Mansfield, The Richest Girl in the World, (New York: G. P. Putnam, 1992), p.155.
25. The Richest Girl in the World, p.154.
26. Oppi Untracht, Traditional Jewelry of India, (New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997), p. 343.
27. Untracht,Traditional Jewelry of India, p.343.
28. Untracht,Traditional Jewelry of India, p. 349.
30 Untracht,Traditional Jewelry of India, p. 347.
31. The Polish opera soprano Ganna Walska sang with Enrico Caruso and played for Arturo Toscanini in the earlytwentieth century. For more information, see Ganna Walska, Always Room at the Top, (New York: Richard R. Smith,
1943).
32. Untracht,Traditional Jewelry of India, p.324. Lac is produced by an insect indigenous to India. It is the only natural resin
of animal origin. It is used as a red dye, as a setting for stones, and is the main ingredient of shellac.
33. For illustrations of Cartier jewelry based on Indian prototypes, see Hans Nadelhoffer, Cartier Jewelers Extraordinary
(New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1984), color plate 35.
34. Untracht,Traditional Jewelry of India, pp. 270, 404.
35. Manuel Keene, et. al., Treasury of the World: Jewelled Arts of India in the Age of the Mughals (London and New York:
Thames & Hudson, 2001), p. 18.
36. Untracht,Traditional Jewelry of India, pp. 348-349.
38. For more information and an illustration a nagaraja attached to a jeweled piece, Traditional Jewelry of India, p. 50-51.
39. A.G. Mitchell, Hindu Gods and Goddesses (New Delhi and London: UBS Publisher’s Distributors Ltd., 1982), plate 47.
25
26
a legacy of gentility
A Legacy of Gentility:
Doris Duke’s Heirloom Jewelry
Because jewelry is a personal possession, owners often attach
hidden meanings and associations to it. As long as it remains
in the domain of one person or one family, as long as we
know who bought it and who owned it, a piece of jewelry
can suggest possible meanings far beyond those apparent in the
Doris Duke and her father, James B. Duke
physical reality of the object. However, with the passage of time,
symbolism grows cloudy and meanings can fade, which is why
so much jewelry often changes hands or is dismantled. Doris Duke owned and kept a number of
pieces of heirloom jewelry that must have meant something special to her, something that linked
her life to those who came before her and lived very different lives from her own. While we
cannot know for certain what these objects meant to her, the fact that she held onto these pieces
throughout her life suggests to us that they held some sort of personal significance.
The jewelry that Doris Duke wore as a child, gifts from her family and friends, tells a story
about the way children were valued by society in the early-twentieth century. The jewelry she
inherited from her grandmother, Florine Russell Holt, speaks eloquently of what jewelry meant
to middle-class women in America in the second half of the nineteenth century. The small group
of jewelry that belonged to James Buchanan Duke must have held its own special significance, a
connection to the man who loved her so unreservedly and died while she was still so young.
With a few exceptions, such as her gold bangle and the seed pearl jewelry, it is unlikely that
Doris Duke wore any of this “legacy” jewelry. It was not in style by the time she was born and,
more importantly, it was not her style as she grew and matured. Nonetheless, she held onto it
because it connected her to her own heritage and reminded her of who she was and from where
she came from.
28
1. Barrette and handy pins
Barrette marked Carter, Sloan & Co.,
Newark, New Jersey
Handy pins, stamped 14k
Pearls, gold
Length of barrette: 2 1⁄4 inches
Doris Duke would have worn this barrette as a
young girl. When she grew older, it was replaced by
more elaborate diamond-set examples.
2. Seed pearl locket
1923
Seed pearl, gold
Verso engraved “Doris Duke 1923”
L: 1 1⁄8 inches
Pearls symbolized innocence and were given to
young girls before they reached their maturity. This
locket is such an example, probably given to Doris
Duke by her father.
3. Bangle
c. 1912
Gold
Engraved in script “MM to DD”
Doris Duke was given this simple, unadorned
bangle when she was a child, perhaps even a baby.
The many dents suggest that it was often worn.
29
4. Pocketknife
c. 1900-1920
Gold
Monogrammed “J.B.D.”
L: 3 inches
A watch and chain, pocketknife, signet ring, tie pin,
and cuff links were de rigueur jewelry for men at
the turn of the century.
5. Cuff links
Carrington & Co., Newark, New Jersey
1900-1920
Amethyst, gold
6. Cuff links
Carrington & Co., Newark, New Jersey
1900-1920
Moonstone, gold, platinum
7. Cuff links
Mark for Tiffany & Co., New York
1900-1920
Turquoise, gold
8. Coral demi-parure, comprising brooch
and ear pendants
c. 1860s
Coral, gold
Length of brooch: 2 inches
Length of ear pendants: 1 3⁄4 inches
The grape was the archetypal plant of the midnineteenth century, symbolizing the fecundity and
plenty of an expanding nation. This demi-parure
retains its original box, keeping it safe from
damage.
9. Coral bracelets
c. 1860s
Coral, gold
L: 6 1⁄2 inches
The florid naturalism popular in the midnineteenth century is evident in these bracelets.
Such Italian-made coral jewelry was commonly
worn among genteel women during the Civil War.
30
10. Pendant watch
Outer case: maker’s mark with anchor/14k/
Dueber/mark with anchor within shield/1376156
Movement: Elgin Nat’l Watch Co/2983182
c. 1890
Yellow, green, and rose gold, diamond
Engraved “FH” on shield reserve
H: 2 1⁄4 inches
In place of the more traditional reliance on
enameling and engraving, watchcase makers
experimented with different color golds to
produce polychromatic designs. This watch is set
with a single diamond, a sparkle point to draw the
eye to the decoration.
11. Demi-parure comprising cameo brooch
and earrings
c. 1880
Agate, pearls, gold
Diameter of brooch: 1 1⁄4 inches
Cameo jewelry was ubiquitous among middle-class
consumers from the time of the Civil War until
the 1890s.
12. Pair of woven bracelets
c. 1880
Gold
Engraved “Holt” on underside of clasp
L: 7 inches
31
13. Chatelaine mesh purse
1900-1910
Diamonds, gold
Stamped “14k”
W: 6 1⁄2 inches
Mesh purses were popular from the 1890s to the
1920s, usually worn suspended by a chatelaine
clip from the waistband or belt. Only wealthy
women carried gold mesh examples; only the
wealthiest had them studded with diamonds.
14. Chatelaine vanity case
c. 1915
Sapphires, diamonds, green gold, mirror, ivory
Engraved on reserve on compartment: DDC
Engraved on lower rim: E.R. Stotesbury,
Philadelphia U.S.A.
H: 3 inches
The vanity case, or nécessaire, was an essential part
of a lady’s attire. It was equipped with a mirror,
ivory writing tablet, and compartments for
powder and lipstick.
32
Nanaline Duke’s Jewelry
a legacy of glamour
33
A Legacy of Glamour:
The Jewelry of Nanaline Holt Inman Duke
Unlike her daughter, Nanaline Holt Inman Duke was not born
to wealth. Having been raised in Macon, Georgia, in what was
kindly referred to as “reduced circumstances,” Nanaline would
have grown up haunted by a sense that fine jewelry was beyond
her reach. With her first marriage to a prosperous businessman,
William Inman, she could at last afford the kind of jewelry
her mother owned before the family’s financial reverses in the
post-Civil War years. When, as a widow in the early-twentieth
Oil painting of Nanaline Duke by Philip
century, she captured the heart of one of the richest men in the
Alexius de Laszlo de Lombos, dated 1926.
world, all financial barriers disappeared. After her marriage to
She is wearing a pearl necklace and the
oriental pearl ring (Fig. 21).
James Buchanan Duke in 1907, the former Nanaline Holt could
at last have anything she wanted, including the finest jewelry.
The great rope of pearls that she wears in her 1926 portrait is probably the one that James B. Duke
bought for her in 1907 at J. Dreicer & Sons in New York, for the astonishing sum of $180,000. (The
invoice survives in the Duke University Rare Book, Manuscript, and Special Collections Library.) In
the days before the introduction of cultured pearls, a natural-pearl necklace like this was as precious
as one set with diamonds. And, of course, not only did her husband buy her opulent gifts, but
Nanaline Duke could also buy herself beautiful jewels—and she did.
The jewelry in this section defines Nanaline Duke’s taste and distinguishes it from that of her
daughter Doris. Unlike Doris Duke, Nanaline did not venture outside the realm of the classic
jewel, nor did she venture into exotic or artistic jewelry. Even when she purchased things that were
similar in style to those her daughter was buying in the 1930s and 1940s, Nanaline favored the
opulent glamour of the early-twentieth century, the era when railroad kings and oil kings and
tobacco kings ruled society, and their wives bedecked themselves in jewels suited to the New World
royalty they considered themselves to be. Whatever the differences in taste, it is evident that her
mother’s love for fine, elegant jewelry made an indelible imprint on Doris Duke that encouraged
the development of her own aesthetic values.
34
15. Diamond and pearl festoon necklace
1908
Diamonds, oriental pearl, platinum.
Approximate weight of pear-shaped diamond:
5.40 carats; approximate weight of cushion-cut
diamond: 4.65 carats; approximate weight of
marquise-cut diamond: 2.40 carats.
Jewelry from the belle époque period is reflective of
the Louis XVI styles made popular by the sale of
the French crown jewels in 1889. Necklaces were
designed in festoons that elegantly draped around
the neck. This necklace was made by Cartier with
a selection of diamonds provided by James B. Duke.
The original invoice is dated December 24, 1908.
35
36
16. Diamond and pearl tiara
Cartier, New York, no. 2419203
1924
Diamonds, oriental pearl, platinum.
Approximate weight of two pear-shaped diamonds:
2.70 and 2.27 carats.
The new industrial wealth of nineteenth-century
America adopted the trappings of European
nobility. Elaborate diamond-studded jewels graced
the bodice of the well-dressed lady, while a tiara
crowned her head. This tiara is believed to have
been purchased at Cartier by Nanaline or James B.
Duke on March 1, 1924, at a cost of $23,000.
This tiara was included in the exhibition, Tiara, at
the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, in 2000 and was
illustrated in the accompanying book, Tiara, by
Diana Scarisbrick.
17. Diamond bracelet
1927
L: 7 inches
Diamonds, platinum.
Approximate weight of marquise-cut diamond: 7.19
carats; of one pear-shaped diamond: 7.03 carats; of
another pear-shaped diamond: 6.24 carats; of two
remaining pear-shaped diamonds: 4.25 and 3.50
carats.
Nanaline Duke’s love of large diamonds is evident
in this bracelet. The geometric shapes of the large
diamonds are juxtaposed with stepped motifs
derived from architecture of ancient civilizations
such as Babylonian ziggurats and Mayan and Aztec
temples.
37
18. Pendant watch and chatelaine pin
On cuvette: Longines/Grand Prix/Paris/1889
Outer case: k18, maker’s mark/783923
c. 1890
Diamonds, enamel, gold
H: 3 inches
This elegant watch probably dates from Nanaline
Duke’s first marriage. Chatelaine watches were
typically worn on the lapel of a dress bodice
during the daytime.
19. Pendant watch
Tiffany & Co., New York
c. 1900
Diamonds, emeralds, platinum, guilloché with
transparent green and blue enamel.
H: 1 5⁄8 inches
Such exquisitely detailed ladies’ watches were
typical of the foremost American and European
jewelry of the day.
38
20. Emerald-cut diamond ring
Tiffany & Co., New York
1935
Diamond, platinum; emerald-cut diamond
weighing approximately 19.72 carats
According to Stephanie Mansfield in The Richest
Girl in the World, Nanaline Duke lost her “$40,000
diamond ring” at a bridge party. It was returned to
her by a friend.
21. Oriental pearl ring
c. 1910
Oriental pearl, diamonds, platinum
Diameter of pearl: 9 mm.
Before Mikimoto perfected the cultured pearl,
oriental pearls were as sought after and as costly as
fine diamonds.
22. Pair of bracelets
c. 1930
Pearls, diamonds, platinum
L: 6 1⁄2 inches
Although the clasps on these bracelets are art deco
in style, the pearls give a softness that evokes the
early years of the twentieth century.
39
40
23. Diamond-set silk evening bag
Cartier, New York
1934
Diamonds, enamel, silk, platinum
H: 5 3⁄4 inches
The severely geometric black and white color
scheme of this evening bag exemplifies the
monochromatic aspect of the art deco style.
24. Diamond and ruby lapel watch
On dial: Jaeger / P.L. Levy
Outer case: no. 77639
c. 1925
Diamonds, rubies, platinum
H: 1 ⁵⁄₁₆ inches
By the mid 1920s, watch casing design had reached an art with
designers creating novelty items such as ring watches, purse
watches and, more rarely, lapel watches.
25. Pair of diamond and sapphire dress clips
American
1940-1945
Diamonds, sapphires, platinum
H: 2 inches
By the end of the 1930s, flowers were once again popular. Made
in a variety of styles and materials, the most favored were
diamond-set confections.
26. Diamond scroll ear clips
Cartier, New York
1933
Diamonds, platinum
H: 1 ⁷⁄₁₆ inches
Even after her husband’s death, Nanaline Duke never lost her
taste for jewelry. She purchased these ear clips from Cartier on
November 22, 1933, for $1,500.
41
42
27. Diamond wristwatch
Dial signed by Charlton & Co., New York; diamond bracelet by
Cartier, New York
Charlton dial and movement, 1922; Cartier diamond bracelet, 1935
Diamonds, platinum
L: 6 3⁄4 inches
On December 20,1922, James B. Duke purchased a diamond
wristwatch with a pearl band from Charlton & Co. On January
29, 1935, Nanaline Duke had Cartier replace the pearl band with
an elaborate diamond-set bracelet, retaining the original dial and
movement.
28. Diamond and sapphire bangle bracelet
1939
Sapphires, diamonds, gold, platinum
43
29. Diamond and pearl bracelet
c. 1920
L: 6 1⁄2 inches
The design on this bracelet with a central
diamond plaque from which strung pearls are
attached is a modification of the choker necklace
from the turn of the century.
30. Ceylon sapphire, pearl and diamond
bracelet
1925
Ceylon sapphire, sapphires, diamonds, pearls,
platinum.
Approximate weight of sapphire: 35.54 carats.
L: 6 1⁄2 inches
James B. Duke continued to lavish gifts of jewelry
on his wife right up to his death in 1925. He
provided Cartier with the stones for this bracelet,
but they did not receive the payment of $5,630
for it until November 8, 1925, after James B.
Duke’s death.
44
an independent woman
An Independent Woman:
Doris Duke’s Jewelry from the 1930s
In 1933, when Doris Duke turned twenty-one, she took a
controlling interest in her affairs, from financial matters to
her personal life, and the change is certainly reflected in the
jewelry she wore. She now preferred important diamond
and precious gemstone jewelry from important jewelers. With
her mother as an expert guide, she shopped at prominent
jewelry maisons, such as Cartier and other establishments
that catered to an elite clientele and offered only the finest
gemstones and designs.
In this photograph by Cecil Beaton, Doris Duke
In the early part of the decade, Doris Duke’s taste was
is wearing the pair of pearl bracelets (Fig. 22) on one wrist,
influenced
by her mother’s jewels, which featured the twoas was the custom in the early 1930s.
dimensional, rectilinear art deco patterns of the 1920s. By
the end of the 1920s, the all-white diamond look reigned
supreme, and imaginative designs made it possible to convert one piece of jewelry into one or more
different pieces. Within a few years, that style evolved into a bolder more sculptural look. In 1935,
Doris Duke and her husband, James Cromwell, traveled extensively in the East on their honeymoon.
This trip would have a major influence on her taste for the rest of her life. She became enchanted
with India —its people, architecture, decorative arts, and jewelry. It would inspire her to build
Shangri La, her magnificent home in Hawaii, and to begin collecting the arts of the East. It was also
at this time that her Western jewelry choices began to favor those with Eastern influences. This new
direction signaled her independence, her beginning to assert herself as her own person. No longer
under the direct influence of her mother’s taste, from then on she would buy only what she liked.
Doris Duke, like many of her contemporaries of similar social and financial position, was
surrounded by fine things and wore the latest fashions. Whereas many of her peers owned objects
for status rather than artistic value, Doris Duke chose to surround herself with articles of artistic
importance, from porcelains, glass, oriental carpets, and furniture to her jewelry. Her upbringing and
resources enabled her to develop a more refined taste than most. She trained her “eye” to distinguish
between what was good and what was mediocre. This is perhaps nowhere more evident than in her
collection of jewelry.
46
31. Emerald bead necklace
c. 1935
Emerald beads, cabochon emerald, diamonds, silver,
gold
Approximate weight of beads: 120.00 carats
Although mined in Colombia, emeralds have a
history with India; they were the stones favored by
the maharajahs, who only wanted the best.
47
48
32. Double strand emerald bead necklace
c. 1935
Emerald beads, cabochon emerald, diamonds,
silver, gold
Approximate weight of beads: 280.00 carats
To find one strand of emerald beads of high quality
is rare; to find two such strands is remarkable.
33. Cabochon emerald, pearl, and
diamond clip brooch
Cartier, New York, no. 54/52481
1934
Cabochon emeralds, diamonds, pearls, gold,
platinum
H: 2 ⁷/₁₆ inches
On December 31, 1934, Doris Duke purchased
a bracelet at Cartier. On January 11, 1935, she
had Cartier convert it to a plaque brooch. In
1954, she asked Cartier to alter it, yet again, to a
double-clip pin.
34. Cabochon emerald, pearl, and
diamond bracelet
1934
Cabochon emeralds, diamonds, pearls, gold,
platinum
L: 6 1⁄2 inches
This bracelet was purchased by Doris Duke
at Cartier, New York, on December 31, 1934.
On January 11, 1935, the following work was
done: “Mounting diamond motif as a bracelet,
supplying pearls. Credit for pearls & clasp.”
49
50
35. Pair of diamond bracelets convertible to
choker necklace
c. 1930
Diamonds, platinum
Length of one bracelet: 6 3⁄4 inches
Length of one bracelet: 7 1⁄4 inches
Length of choker: 13 1⁄4 inches
Unlike her mother who loved large diamonds,
Doris Duke seems to have focused more on the
design of her jewelry. On these bracelets, the
diamonds, while lavish, are subordinate to the
severe, ice-like geometric design.
36. Pair of diamond clip brooches with
double-clip fitting
Flato, New York
1942
Diamonds, gold, platinum
H: 2 inches
W: 3 1⁄2 inches
Doris Duke purchased the clip brooches from
Paul Flato on July 13, 1942, for $10,000. They
show the increasing flamboyance of the early
1940s and a rejection of the stark geometry of the
art deco style.
37. Pair of diamond clip brooches with gold
bangle fitting
Cartier, New York
1930
Diamonds, platinum, gold
Width of clip brooch: 2 1⁄2 inches
On December 23, 1930, Nanaline Duke purchased
the clip brooches with the gold bangle fitting from
Cartier. There is evidence that later Nanaline may
have given this piece as a wedding gift to Doris
Duke when she married James Cromwell.
51
38. Pair of diamond chandelier ear pendants
Cartier, New York
1937
Briolette diamonds, diamonds, platinum
H: 1 3⁄8 inches
Approximate weight of briolette diamonds: 12.00
carats.
Doris Duke purchased the ear pendants from
Cartier, New York, on April 30, 1937, for $4,950.
39. Pearl and diamond ear clips
Flato, New York
D: 3⁄4 inches
On January 2, 1940, Flato assembled the ear clips
for Doris Duke Cromwell, noting, “Remounting
your pearls and round diamonds and supplying
necessary diamonds and pearls as a pair of platinum
mounted ear clips.”
40. Pair of diamond hair slides
Cartier, New York
1937
Diamonds, platinum
L: 2 inches
Like several of her pieces, these hair slides were
converted from one form to another. On April
30, 1937, Doris Duke purchased a clip brooch/hair
barrette from Cartier, New York, for $1,900. At a
later date, she had it changed into hair slides.
52
41. Lapis and gem-set vanity case
Cartier, New York no. 1479
1937
Lapis lazuli, emeralds, rubies, sapphires, enamel,
gold
W: 2 inches
L: 3 1⁄2 inches
The nécessaire, or vanity case, became a standard
feminine accessory of the 1920s and 1930s, often
embellished with Eastern motifs. The decoration
on this vanity case with the central enamel
decoration is reminiscent of Persian carpets. Doris
Duke purchased it from Cartier, New York, on
April 13, 1937, for $2,500.
53
42. Diamond and rock crystal Taj Mahal clip
brooch
c. 1935
Diamond, sapphires, black onyx, rock crystal,
platinum, white metal
H: 1 1⁄8 inches
When Doris Duke and James Cromwell went on
their honeymoon to India, they traveled to Agra
to see the Taj Mahal. It was reported that when
she saw the Mogul temple, she said, “I want one
of those.” Perhaps this brooch is a remembrance of
their journey.
43. Diamond “junk” brooch
c. 1940
Diamonds, sapphires, ruby, platinum
H: 1 3⁄8 inches
Although glamorous in their own right, such
little jewels as these were most likely of personal
importance to Doris Duke.
54
a woman of substance
Doris Duke’s jewelry from the 1940s onward
A Woman of Substance:
Doris Duke’s Jewelry from the 1940s Onward
The next milestone in Doris Duke’s life occurred in 1943. The divorce
from James Cromwell freed her from the dominating influence of her
middle-aged husband. She took full command of her own life. Her net
worth was estimated to be more than $300 million. She could buy just
about anything she desired. While she did, in fact, spend money on
homes and a lavish lifestyle, it was done with class, taste, and knowledge
of value. In her jewelry purchases, she chose pieces that were tasteful and
harmonized with her lifestyle. Since she already had diamond-set jewels,
Doris Duke is wearing the hair slides (Fig. 40)
her attention turned to jewelry she could wear during the day or into the
and pearl and diamond bracelet (Fig. 29 ) by Cartier
evening for dinner.
and the snowflake ear clips (Fig. 66 ) by Van Cleef &
Miss Duke frequented the smaller jewelry salons in New York City
Arpels in this photograph by Wallace Seawell.
of Paul Flato, Fulco di Verdura, and Seaman Schepps, designers who were
at the “cutting edge,” creating a new aesthetic in jewelry design. These
designers maintained small salons and dealt directly with clients, creating special, one-of-a-kind pieces. She
would often have them make new pieces of jewelry from gemstones that she purchased on her travels or
that she had extracted from out-dated pieces. Into Verdura she would go with a parcel of stones to have
made into something exciting, something different.
From the 1940s onward, Miss Duke’s taste turned to interesting, unusual jewelry. For example, at Van
Cleef & Arpels, instead of diamond-set brooches or bracelets, she chose a suite with rubies, sapphires, and
diamonds with “Hawaii” flowers; her love of the island is reflected in this purchase (Fig. 73). By the 1960s,
she was a regular client at David Webb in New York City, selecting jewelry often inspired by the East.
Color contrasts characterize her jewelry from this period. Her jewelry choices became large in scale and
were bought in suites. Earrings were not the small pieces from the 1930s or 1940s that hugged the earlobes;
instead they were long and dangling ear pendants. She wore her blonde hair long, slightly pushed back to
accentuate her beautiful ear accoutrements.
That Doris Duke loved jewelry is evident from even a casual examination of her vast collection. She
continued to buy jewels until the end of her life. In 1991, just two years before she died, she bought the
Cartier emerald bead ear clips at auction (Fig. 64). It is fitting that one of her last jewelry purchases is a piece
by a maker that both she and her mother had patronized regularly many years before.
56
44. Turquoise, sapphire, and diamond bracelet
David Webb, New York
1965
Turquoise, sapphires, diamonds, gold, platinum
L: 7 inches
Doris Duke purchased this bracelet from David
Webb on May 8, 1965, the same day she bought a
coordinating necklace (Fig.46). The bracelet was
valued at $7,700, but she was given a “special price”
of $6,000.
45. Pair of sapphire, turquoise, and diamond
ear clips
1969
Turquoise, sapphires, diamonds, platinum
H: 2 inches
These earrings show a strong influence of Indian
jewelry, reflecting Doris Duke’s passionate interest
in Mogul forms at this stage of her life. Most of the
stones for these ear clips were supplied by Doris
Duke with additional stones from David Webb’s
stock.
46. Turquoise, sapphire, and diamond fringe
necklace
1965
Turquoise, sapphires, diamonds, gold, platinum
This necklace was assembled by David Webb with
stones Doris Duke owned as well as others to
complete the design. She may have disassembled
one of her mother’s sapphire pieces, inherited
in 1962, or something of her own. The records
indicate she purchased it, along with a coordinating
bracelet (Fig.44) on May 8, 1965.
57
47. Emerald-bead two-strand necklace
1969
Emerald beads, diamonds, gold
This necklace was assembled by David Webb with
emerald beads Doris Duke owned. He created the
clasp and spacers with diamonds.
48. Pair of emerald-bead drops
1957
Emerald beads, diamonds, platinum
H: 1 1⁄4 inches
On November 30, 1957, Doris Duke purchased
from David Webb the emerald bead drops along
with the diamond-set scroll ear clips (Fig. 56 )
from which to hang them (illustrated below as a
combined piece).
58
49. Pink topaz and diamond “flower twist”
suite consisting of necklace, bracelet, and
ear clips
Verdura, Inc., New York
1966
Precious pink topaz, diamonds, gold, platinum
Height of ear clips: 1 5⁄8 inches
When viewed in the context of Doris Duke’s other
jewelry, this suite with pink topaz is atypical of
her jewelry, which is usually set with darker hued
gemstones. She purchased this suite from Verdura
for $27,500 on March 1, 1966.
59
60
50. Citrine and gold crossover necklace
Verdura, New York
1940
Citrines, gold
Before opening his own salon in 1939, Fulco
di Verdura worked for Paul Flato, whose noted
creations include a vine crossover necklace. Perhaps
that necklace inspired Verdura when he created this
design. This necklace was assembled by him with
twenty-seven citrines from Doris Duke’s collection
and twenty-four that he supplied. On May 29,
1940, she paid $800 for it.
51. Pair of ruby bead drops
1969
Ruby beads, diamonds, gold
H: 1 1⁄4 inches
Doris Duke purchased the ruby bead drops along
with a ruby bead fringe necklace (Fig.52 ) from
David Webb on October 10, 1969.
52. Ruby bead and cultured pearl fringe
necklace
1969
Ruby beads, cultured pearls, gold
A remarkable example of Doris Duke’s recycling
of old jewelry, this Indian-style fringe necklace was
assembled by David Webb from three single-strand
strings of pearls, consisting of 37, 49, and 53 pearls
each, supplied by Doris Duke. She also provided
Webb with 14 loose pearls and 1,136 ruby beads.
She paid for this necklace and a pair of ruby bead
drops (Fig.51) on October 10, 1969.
61
53. A graduated opal bead necklace
1969
Opal beads, crystal rondels, diamonds, gold,
platinum
Using her own stones, Doris Duke ordered this
opal bead necklace and the matching earrings from
David Webb. It was purchased on October 10, 1969.
The art deco style clasp was probably a readaption
of another piece of jewelry.
54. Pair of opal and crystal ear pendants
Opals, crystal, gold
H: 2 1⁄4 inches
62
55. Diamond tassel clip brooch
1957
Diamonds, platinum
H: 2 5⁄8 inches
Approximate weight of large pear-shaped diamond:
9.67 carats; of small pear-shaped diamond: 3.65
carats; of marquise-cut diamond: 5.00 carats; of
baguette-cut diamond: 2.50 carats; of circular-cut
diamond: 11.00 carats.
This splendid brooch was assembled by David
Webb from a bracelet with a pear-shaped diamond
that was given to Doris Duke by her mother in
December 1949. The largest stone had been a
gift from James B. Duke to his wife. In 1957, Miss
Duke had David Webb remake it into this brooch.
56. Pair of diamond scroll earrings
Diamonds, platinum
H: 1 1⁄8 inches
The earrings were originally made to accompany
the emerald bead drops (Fig. 48 ) and were
purchased on November 30, 1957.
57. Cushion-cut sapphire ring
American
c. 1950
Sapphire, diamonds, platinum
63
58. Carved sapphire, ruby, and diamond
bracelet
Van Cleef & Arpels, Paris, no. 3744
c. 1945
Sapphires, rubies, diamonds, gold
Length with tassel: 9 inches
59. Gold powder compact
Rubies, gold
c. 1955
W: 2 1⁄8 inches
L: 3 ³⁄₁₆ inches
64
60. Cabochon sapphire bunch of grapes
clip brooch
Seaman Schepps, New York
1941
Cabochon sapphires, emeralds, diamonds, gold,
platinum
H: 3 1⁄2 inches
The revived naturalism of the 1940s is
exemplified in this sculptural brooch. Doris
Duke purchased it from Seaman Schepps for
$2,500 on June 10, 1941.
62. Cabochon sapphire, diamond, and
gem-set bracelet
c. 1937
Cabochon sapphires, rubies, emeralds,
diamonds, gold, platinum
L: 7 3⁄8 inches
Doris Duke had Seaman Schepps alter the
buckle of this bracelet in 1952.
61. Pair of cabochon sapphire and
diamond ear clips
1955
Cabochon sapphires, diamonds, gold, platinum
Doris Duke purchased these ear clips from
Seaman Schepps on December 1, 1955.
65
66
63. Gem-set vanity case
Verdura, New York
1940
Brown, green, and yellow tourmalines, citrines,
beryl, gold
W: 2 3⁄8 inches
L: 3 3⁄4 inches
Doris Duke purchased the vanity case from
Verdura, Inc., on December 16, 1940. She then had
the olivines in the original case unset and a new
gold case cover added, then mounted the special
jeweled outer case. The original case cost $1,250,
and the cost of the work was $2,950, so the total
cost was $4,495 with tax.
64. Pair of emerald bead ear clips
Cartier, Paris no. r8427
c. 1967
Emeralds, emerald beads, gold
H: 1 7⁄8 inches
On June 8, 1967, a special order was placed
at Cartier, Paris, for the earclips which were
originally designed with diamonds along the
edge and middle vein and the leaf itself with
emeralds. On May 12, 1976, the client replaced
the diamonds with 100 emeralds. These ear
clips were then sold at auction at Sotheby’s,
New York, on June 12, 1991, lot no. 283, where
Doris Duke bought them for $99,000.
65. Graduated, single row, jade bead
necklace
c. 1950
Jade beads, jade, gold
L: 16 1⁄2 inches
Approximate diameter of beads:
12.8 to 12.9 mm.
67
66. Pair of diamond snowflake ear clips
Van Cleef & Arpels, New York, no. 56611
1946
Diamonds, platinum
D: 1 1⁄4 inches
During the 1940s,Van Cleef & Arpels introduced
new jewelry forms based on everyday items such
as the pocket handkerchief and, in 1946, the
snowflake. Doris Duke purchased ear clips in this
form in diamonds.
67. Pair of aquamarine and diamond scroll
ear clips
Van Cleef & Arpels, Paris
c. 1945
Aquamarines, diamonds, platinum
H: 1 inch
68. Diamond and yellow gold choker
c. 1950
L: 17 1⁄4 inches
Doris Duke wore this necklace at her wedding to
Porfirio Rubirosa on September 1, 1947.
68
69. Pair of diamond and pearl ear pendants
David Webb, Inc., New York
c. 1960
Cultured pearls, baroque pearls, diamonds,
platinum
H: 3 1⁄2 inches
Like much of Doris Duke’s jewelry from David
Webb, these large-scale ear pendants show strong
Indian influence. The large size is characteristic of
jewelry from the 1960s.
69
70. Turquoise, freshwater pearl, and diamond
Indian head brooch
1957
Turquoise, freshwater pearl, diamonds, gold,
platinum
H: 1 1⁄2 inches
The Indian on the reverse of the five-cent piece
was the inspiration for this brooch. An irregular
baroque pearl forms the headdress.
71. Diamond and gold feather brooch
c. 1945
H: 4 1⁄4 inches
72. Pair of diamond and pearl fluted ear
clips
Flato, New York
1939
Diamonds, pearls, gold
L: 1 3⁄4 inches
Doris Duke purchased these ear clips from Paul
Flato on December 23, 1939.
70
73. Suite of “Hawaii” flower jewelry
comprising bracelet, ear clips and ring
Van Cleef & Arpels, Paris, no. 50031
1947
Height of ear clips: 1 3⁄4 inches
Length of bracelet: 6 1⁄2 inches
In the 1940s,Van Cleef & Arpels created many
different types of jewelry with floral motifs. One
such design was set with “Hawaii” flowers, ruby
and sapphire flowers with diamond centers. The
sapphire flower for the bracelet was bought on
December 23, 1947, for $6,500.
74. Ruby, sapphire and diamond clip brooch
c. 1947
H: 2 1⁄4 inches
71
72
75. Ivory, pearl, and diamond chess piece
brooch
1940
Ivory, rubies, pearls, diamonds, gold
H: 3 1⁄4 inches
This chess piece is one of a large series of these
brooches that Fulco di Verdura made from an
eighteenth-century set of painted ivory chessmen
from India. Inspired by Johann Melchior
Dinglinger’s The Court of the Grand Moghul, a group
of elaborate gem-set figures at the Green Vaults
in Dresden,Verdura dressed the figures in gold,
gemstones, and pearls. They were purchased by
many prominent leaders of society including Mrs.
William H. Harkness and Mrs. Jules Stein, and on
May 25, 1940, Doris Duke bought one for $400.
76. Gold, curb-link charm bracelet
Gold, diamonds, turquoise
L: 7 inches
Four charms comprising a gold and diamond St.
Christopher medal by Cartier, a folded one-dollar
bill, a turquoise and diamond heart, and a “chick”
locket
This charm bracelet is the type that any woman
of the period might have worn and is probably
typical of the personal jewelry that Doris Duke
wore with sport attire.
77. Two-color, gold charm bracelet
Gold
L: 7 inches
Four swimming medallions awarded to Sam
Kahanamoku
This bracelet was given to Doris Duke by her
friend, Sam Kahanamoku. The reverse of one of
the medals is inscribed, “To Lahilahi from Meleana
June 13, 1944.” Lahilahi was Miss Duke’s nickname
in Hawaii.
78. Ruby and pearl watch bracelet
On dial: Verdura
c. 1945
Rubies, pearls, gold, cord; reverse with polychrome
enamel
L: 6 inches
Although the dial on this watch is signed Verdura,
it is not known whether he actually made the
bracelet or if it was a band that he acquired in
India and then set a watch into it. Because of its
Indian design, it would appeal to Doris Duke.
73
74
79. Diamond and platinum necklace mount
Cartier, New York
1937
Diamonds, platinum
This necklace mount is a particularly vivid reminder of how
Doris Duke continually recycled stones from her jewelry as
she refashioned her collection over the years. She purchased an
important diamond necklace from Cartier, New York, on April
30, 1937, for $65,000. Over the years, she unmounted many of
the diamonds, setting them in other pieces of jewelry.
east meets west
75
East Meets West:
Doris Duke’s Indian/Southeast Asian Jewelry
On her first trip to India during her year-long
honeymoon, Doris Duke must have been entranced
by the decorative arts and architecture she saw, little of
which would have been familiar to Americans of that era.
There were a few Indian philosophers and artists who
had traveled in America, such as Uday Shankar (the older
brother of Ravi Shankar), who made a well-publicized
Doris Duke wearing the diamond, pearl, and sapphire
tour
with his musicians and dancers in the early 1930s, but
Indian necklace (Fig. 88). Photograph by George Hurrell.
India and its culture were still quite mysterious to most
people in this country.
At that time, the princely states in pre-independence India were still supporting thousands of
craftsmen as they had for hundreds of years. Work in metal and stone, textiles, and, above all, jewelry,
was exquisite. Indian jewelry, like other Indian decorative arts, leaves no surface unadorned; any part of
the body that can support decoration receives it. The country’s long tradition of jewelry comes from a
combination of factors: availability of gemstones, vast wealth accumulated from the trade in spices and
textiles, and a large pool of skilled craftspeople. Until diamonds were discovered in Brazil in 1725,
India had a world monopoly on diamonds, all mined in the old kingdom of Golconda. Rubies were
imported from Burma (now Myanmar), sapphires from Sri Lanka (until a source of good sapphires was
discovered in Kashmir in 1880, now completely mined out), and emeralds from Colombia. Pearls came
from the Persian Gulf and Sri Lanka. Lesser gemstones were available in plentiful supply as well.
While in India, Doris Duke and her husband would have met upper-class British Colonial officers
and their wives and the most Westernized and wealthy of the (male) Indian elite, those who fraternized
with their British counterparts.Very few Indian women would have been comfortable in such company,
so it is doubtful that Doris Duke gained much direct knowledge of Indian jewelry until later. She did
develop a passion for Mogul architecture on that first trip, which eventually became the raison d’être of
her house in Hawaii, Shangri La.
Because she was such a tall and striking woman, Doris Duke could wear jewelry that would have
overwhelmed someone more petite. Once she did start collecting Indian jewelry, she chose spectacular
pieces that she could wear with the more flamboyant clothes of the era. She also developed a taste for the
somewhat more delicate and refined jewelry from Southeast Asia, primarily Thailand. The Indian and
Southeast Asian ornaments in this exhibition will serve to illustrate her discerning eye for the exuberant
but beautifully crafted adornments that would suit her as well as it suited their original owners.
76
80. Diamond pendant necklace
India
Diamonds, platinum
Doris Duke purchased a necklace (illustrated
in photo below) at auction at the Parke-Bernet
Galleries’ sale, “Important Jewelry Collection of
Madame Ganna Walska,” lot no. 80, on April 1,
1971, for $62,500. The original necklace consisted
of five pendant elements, each section set with
two triangular-shaped diamonds. At that sale, she
also purchased lot no. 81, a diamond pendant clip,
and lot no. 82, diamond pendant earrings. These
two pieces were probably added to the necklace to
create the chandelier-style pendant hanging from
the center diamond.
77
East Meets West:
78
81. Champa-Kali ruby and diamond cluster bracelet
India
Late 17th and early 18th century
Rubies, diamonds, gold; reverse with polychrome enamel
W: 4 1⁄2 inches
L: 9 inches
This bracelet was probably part of a set with a coordinating
necklace with similar ruby-set floral units from which
pendant pearl elements are suspended. Doris Duke
purchased this bracelet at the Parke-Bernet Galleries’ sale,
“Important Jewelry Collection of Madame Ganna Walska,”
lot no. 104, on April 1, 1971, for $3,250.
82. Pair of diamond, ruby, and enamel rigid
gold bangles
Jaipur
c. 1900
Rubies and diamonds in kundan settings, enamel,
gold; inside with polychrome enamel
83. Pair of ruby, diamond, and enamel rigid
gold bangles
Jaipur
Early 20th century
Rubies and diamonds in kundan settings, enamel,
gold; inside with polychrome enamel
84. Pair of ruby, diamond, seed pearl, and
enamel rigid gold bangles
Jaipur
Late 18th or early 19th century
Rubies and diamonds in kundan settings, seed
pearls, enamel, gold; inside with polychrome
enamel
This type of rigid, enameled bangle, with or
without gemstones, continues to be an extremely
popular style in India and one that is most easily
worn by Westerners as well. The practice of
enameling the unseen reverse side of Jaipur-style
jewelry is partly to preserve the original gold
content of the bangle as well as to increase the
rigidity of the bangle.
79
East Meets West:
80
85. Pair of diamond and enamel armlets
Jaipur
19th century
Diamonds, gold, silk and metal-thread cord; reverse
with polychrome enamel
L: 7 inches
Variations of flexible armlets, called bazuband,
appear in Indian folk jewelry and have been
extensively copied by Western jewelry designers.
A diamond and gold version was made by René
Boivin in 1950.
86. Enameled and inset gold necklace
Jaipur
Early 20th century
Seed pearls, rubies, diamonds, red glass beads, silk
and metal-thread cord; reverse with polychrome
enamel
87. Ruby, diamond, and gold necklace
India
Cabochon rubies, diamonds, gold, silk cord; reverse
81
East Meets West:
82
88. Diamond, pearl, and sapphire
gold necklace
Jaipur
19th century
Diamonds, sapphire beads, pearls, seed pearls, blue
glass beads, enamel, gold, silk cord; reverse with
polychrome enamel
89. Diamond, gem-set, and pearl gold arya necklace
Bikaner
19th century
Diamonds in kundan settings, sapphires, emeralds, rubies, seed pearls,
gold, silk cord; reverse with polychrome enamel
Arya necklaces, extremely complex examples of the goldsmith’s art,
are often worn attached to the neck by multiple strings of glass seed
beads and silk tassels. Doris Duke purchased this necklace at the
Parke-Bernet Galleries’ sale “The Important Jewelry Collection of
Madame Ganna Walska,” lot no. 102 on April 1, 1971, for $2,600.
83
East Meets West:
84
90. Carved emerald and diamond gold
pendant
India
18th century, setting early 19th century
W: 2 3⁄4 inches
Carved emerald in hexagonal (shashpahlu) form,
emerald beads, diamonds in kundan setting, pearls,
gold; reverse with polychrome enamel
The hexagonal form became a standard shape for
Mogul emeralds because the actual crystal is shaped
in that way. Beginning in the sixteenth century,
lapidaries became skilled at engraving floral designs
in low relief on these special stones.
91. Pair of seed pearl and glass bead gold
ear ornaments
India
19th or 20th century
Seed pearls, glass beads, diamonds, enamel, gold,
cord
H: 6 3⁄4 inches
These long ear ornaments are still an
indispensable element in Indian bridal finery
and are also used in dance costumes. They are
worn firmly fastened to the hair or to other
jewelry for security as well as to reduce the
weight on the ear.
92. White sapphire, ruby, seed pearl, and
gold bale jhabbedar ear ornaments
Delhi
19th century
White sapphires, rubies, seed pearls, emerald
beads, enamel, gold, cord
H: 9 1⁄2 inches
An ornamental chain with a hook for
attachment to the hair supports the bale
jhabbedar earrings. This design dates to the
Mogul period.
85
East Meets West:
86
93.Gem-set and enamel gold armlet
Jaipur
20th century
Colored gemstones and rubies in kundan
settings, gold; reverse with polychrome enamel
L: 7 inches
The stones on this armlet are set in the classical
Hindu navaratna (nine gemstones) arrangement,
a powerful amulet symbolizing the power of
the sun and all the planets in relation to the
universe. It was believed that such an armlet
would allow the wearer to “manipulate celestial
forces for personal benefit.”
94. Diamond, gem-set, and enamel gold
flexible bracelet
Jaipur
Late 19th century
Diamonds, foil-backed corundums, gold;
reverse with polychrome enamel
L: 7 inches
95. Pair of gem-set gold hand ornaments
(hathphul) with finger rings (panchangala)
Jaipur
19th century
Emeralds, diamonds, rubies, gold, silver, cord
L: 5 1⁄4 inches
The hand ornament or hathphul is a traditional
wedding jewel based on a lotus flower. It is worn
on the back of the hand, secured by a bracelet and
four finger rings and is hinged at many points for
flexibility.
87
East Meets West:
96. Pair of diamond and enamel gold “lotus”
bracelets
Probably Hyderabad
Late 18th century
Diamonds, gold, cord; reverse with polychrome
enamel
Length of one: 6 1⁄4 inches
97. Pair of beryl, enamel, and gold “guard”
bangles
Rajasthan
Late 19th century
Enamel, beryl, gold
In northwestern India (Rajasthan and Gujerat),
these large bangles are worn in pairs on each
arm, above and below a set of smaller bangles or
bracelets.
88
98. Pair of seed pearl bracelets
India
Late 19th century
Seed pearls, diamonds, enamel, metal-thread cord
L: 6 inches
The effect of gajre, granulated silver or gold balls,
is emulated here with seed pearls. The oval or
half-spherical form covered with real or imitation
granulation is often used in Indian jewelry.
99. White sapphire and enamel gold belt
Jaipur
Late 19th century
White sapphires, seed pearls, gold; reverse with
polychrome enamel
89
East Meets West:
90
100. Ruby pendant necklace
Madras, Tamil Nadu
Rubies, diamonds, emeralds, gold, cord
Two stylized peacocks facing a center rosette
form the upper part of two pendants. The
rubies come from Myanmar (Burma), which
has been known as a source of rubies to
Europeans since the late-fifteenth century.
101. Diamond hair ornament (part of a
jadanagam, braid ornament)
Tamil Nadu
Late 19th century
Diamonds, emeralds, rubies
W: 2 1⁄2 inches
L: 3 inches
This is the main part of a hair ornament
traditionally worn by south Indian Hindu
brides or by Bharata-natyam dancers. The
missing upper part, fastened to the back of the
head, would represent the sun, the new moon,
and a fragrant flower (thazambhu). This section
represents the nagaraja (literally, snake-king)
and would be fastened at the nape of the
neck. Attached to the bottom of this ornament
would be a long, jeweled piece which would
entirely cover a hair braid and end in three
large silk tassels.
102. Diamond necklace
Delhi
Late 19th century
Diamonds, pearl, ruby glass beads, gold; reverse
with enamel
103. Pair of diamond pendants
India
Diamonds, gold, enamel
91
East Meets West:
92
104. Pair of diamond gold chain-link
anklets (jarao ka paizeb)
Northern India
Late 18th century
Diamonds in kundan settings, enamel, gold;
reverse in polychrome enamel
Feet are as visible as hands in Indian traditional
dress, and jewelry in the form of anklets and
toe-rings is always worn. The foot is given
additional decoration with mehndi (henna)
designs.
105. Diamond gold buckle
Southeast Asia
Diamonds, gold
W: 3 inches
H: 2 1⁄4 inches
106. Diamond gold buckle
Southeast Asia
Diamonds, gold
W: 4 inches
H: 3 1⁄4 inches
This buckle with its refined, delicate goldwork
and small diamonds is very different in
character to the kind of work in such pieces as
the gold belt from Jaipur in Figure 99.
107. Enameled and gold cigarette holder
Jaipur
20th century
Enamel, gold
L: 2 3⁄8 inches
This cigarette holder is a charming novelty item,
one that was probably made for the Western
market.
108. Silver gilt and synthetic ruby armlet
Thai
Synthetic rubies, silver gilt
L: 10 1⁄2 inches
93
East Meets West:
109. Silver gilt and synthetic ruby fringe
necklace
Southeast Asia
20th century
110. Bib necklace
India
White zircons, enameled miniatures, base metal, silk
cord; reverse with polychrome enamel
This necklace of small, enameled religious paintings
is decorative but also has apotropaic qualities to
protect the wearer. It is a more elaborate version of
the amulet necklace commonly worn by Hindus
to show devotion to a particular god or goddess.
94
Catalog of Un-exhibited Jewelry and Objects
Throughout her life, Doris Duke collected jewelry and small decorative objects. Her
acquisitions covered a wide range of artistic and intrinsically valuable pieces, from
carefully selected, elaborate jewels set with diamonds and precious stones at the vanguard
of designs, styles, and techniques to unassuming jewels she purchased to wear in a casual
way or to complement particular outfits. If something caught her eye, she just bought it.
The preceding material in this catalog discusses and illustrates those pieces judged by
the authors as the most important in the Doris Duke collection. The following illustrated
listing of jewelry and objects comprise the extant remainder of her collection. While it
includes representations from major jewelry houses such as Cartier, Tiffany & Co., Paul
Flato, Seaman Schepps, and Van Cleef & Arpels, as well as objects from Gucci and Bulgari,
a significant portion consists of unmarked jewelry from other American makers as well
as figural brooches of animals, birds, and flowers, an assortment of rings, some with the
stones removed, bead necklaces, and groups of loose gemstones that she probably intended
to have made into jewelry.
Similarly, when she traveled to India and Southeast Asia, Doris Duke frequently
purchased jewelry from the area, not only major pieces but often simpler jewelry she
found attractive or representative of a particular region. Looking at this part of her
collection, one discerns certain patterns. Enameled rigid bangles seemed to be favorite
choices, most likely because they were so easy to wear and colorful. She had a penchant
for long, dangling ear pendants, probably to take advantage of her tall stature. She also
collected enameled buttons suitable for sewing on her garments.
It is clear that, regardless of the monetary value, Doris Duke chose consistently, guided
by a well-defined aesthetic, relying on her unerring eye to identify her selections. She thus
imprinted something of herself onto even the humblest pieces she acquired. We can be
grateful she did.
96
116. Guard ring
American
Diamonds, platinum
From the wear on this ring, it was
probably Nanaline Duke’s guard ring.
111. and 112.
Dress set and scarf
pin
Dress set
American, c. 1900
Mother-of-pearl, diamonds, gold
Scarf pin
English, c. 1900
Sapphire, diamonds, gold
L: 2 3⁄8 inches
On April 11, 1955, a notation in the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation
archives: “…diamond & sapphire stick pin (500) from Mrs. Duke
to DD.” Upon her mother’s death in 1962, Doris Duke inherited a
“sapphire and diamond stick pin-6 round diamonds (old mine,
off color).”
117. Two coins
113. Collection of ten gold coins
Comprising one ten-dollar piece, two
sovereigns, one Egyptian, four fivedollar pieces, a one-dollar piece, and
a twenty-franc piece
118. Gold and enamel box
Swiss, Late 19th century
Gold, cloisonné enamel
L: 3 1⁄2 inches
114. Seed pearl demi-parure
Comprising brooch and earrings
American, c. 1880
Seed pearls, foil-backed gemstones,
mother-of-pearl, string
119. Group of miscellaneous jewelry
Comprising a lapis lazuli heart
pendant on gold chain, a white jade
and oriental character pendant, a gold
three coin ring, an opal and gold
baby ring, one jade frog earscrew, a
freshwater pearl and beryl charm
necklace, an amethyst and silver
swizzle stick.
115. Group of four rings
American, c. 1960s
One with gold, diamonds
One with coral, diamonds, gold
One with coral, diamonds, gold,
platinum
One with gold, diamond
120. Open-face gold pocketwatch
Hamilton Watch Co., Lancaster,
Pennsylvania, c. 1910
Gold, steel
H: 2 1⁄2 inches
On case, monogram “WIP” for Walker
Patterson Inman
97
121. Carved opal and diamond
pansy brooch
American, c. 1895
Carved opal, diamonds, gold
H: 1 1⁄2 inches
126. Fob watch/brooch
c. 1935
Silver, stainless steel, leather
L: 2 1⁄2 inches
122. Diamond and enamel
forget-me-not brooch
American, c. 1895
Enamel, diamonds, gold
H: 1 1⁄2 inches
127. Sapphire, ruby, and diamond
torsade necklace
American, c. 1960
Cabochon sapphire beads, cabochon
sapphires, cabochon rubies, gold,
platinum
123. Opal and diamond
floral bangle
American
c. 1895
Gold, opal, diamonds, enamel
128. Two opal and gold rings
and a pair of earrings
American, c. 1960
Opals, gold
124. Two rings
c. 1935
One with diamonds set in platinum
by Cartier
One with rubies set in platinum,
unmarked
129. Sapphire and diamond ring
American, c. 1960
Sapphire, diamonds, gold, platinum
Approximate weight of sapphire:
5.60 carats
125. Diamond and sapphire
tassel pendant
c. 1905
Diamonds, sapphires, platinum
L: 1 3⁄4 inches
130. Diamond wristwatch
Le Coultre, Geneva, c. 1950-55
Diamonds, platinum, steel, glass
L: 7 inches
Doris Duke purchased this wristwatch
at Parke-Bernet Galleries in New York
on November 20, 1969, for $7,000.
98
131. Emerald and diamond ring
Tiffany & Co., New York, c. 1920
Emerald, diamonds, platinum
Doris Duke may have worn this ring
as a young girl.
136. Cultured pearl and diamond
gold bangle
c. 1970
South Sea golden pearls measuring
approximately 12.00 x 14.00 mm,
diamonds, white and yellow gold,
platinum
132. Jade ring
Jade, gold
137. Seed pearl necklace with
gem-set clasps
American
c. 1960
Seed pearls, diamonds, cabochon
rubies and sapphires, gold.
133. Two gold bracelets
One with gold ball set with colored
gemstone
One with gold ball set with turquoise
138. Pair of diamond and wirework
hoop earrings
Sterlé, Paris, no. 3318, c. 1960
Diamonds, gold
H: 1 3⁄4 inches
134. Sapphire bead single strand
necklace
Seaman Schepps, New York, 1955
Sapphire beads, cabochon sapphires,
gold
L: 16 1⁄2 inches
Doris Duke purchased this
necklace from Seaman Schepps
on December 1, 1955.
139. Multistrand chalcedony bead
and simulated ruby bead bracelet
Flato, New York, 1940
Chalcedony beads, simulated ruby
beads, diamonds, gold
L: 8 1⁄4 inches
Doris Duke purchased this bracelet
from Paul Flato on January 2, 1940.
135. Cultured pearl and diamond
flower brooch
c. 1970
South Sea golden pearl, diamonds,
white and yellow gold.
South Sea golden pearl measuring
approximately 14.50 mm.
H: 1 3⁄4 inches
140. Group of gemstones
Comprising thirteen emerald-cut
aquamarines
99
141. Group of diamonds
Comprising one cushion-cut
diamond, three circular-cut diamonds
and twenty-three baguette-cut
diamonds
146. Ring and bracelet
set with topaz
Topaz, gold
Length of bracelet: 6 1⁄2 inches
Doris Duke purchased the bracelet
from Seaman Schepps on December
12, 1940.
142. Diamond and gold mesh
evening purse
American, c. 1950
Diamonds, woven gold
L: 7 inches
147. Amethyst and gold brooch
American, c. 1945
Amethysts, gold
H: 1 3⁄8 inches
143. Sterling silver minaudiere
Gucci, Italian, c. 1950
Sterling silver, black onyx
L: 6 inches
148. Sapphire and diamond hair pin
Cartier, Paris, New York
Sapphires, diamonds, gold, platinum
H: 1 1⁄2 inches
144. Turquoise, lapis lazuli, and
diamond cluster brooch
American, c. 1965
Turquoise, lapis lazuli, diamonds, gold
D: 1 1⁄2 inches
149. Citrine ear pendants
American
c. 1950
H: 1 1⁄8 inches
145. Citrine gold flower brooch
American, c. 1945
Citrines, gold
H: 2 1⁄4 inches L: 4 1⁄4 inches
150. A tumbled semi-precious
gem-set and gold necklace
100
151. Single strand pearl necklace
Pearls, diamond
156. Group of gold, platinum, and
diamond-set mounts
Diamonds, emerald, gold, platinum
152. Sapphire and sterling
silver cigarette case
Marchak, Paris, c. 1940
Sapphires, sterling silver, gold
L: 4 1⁄2 inches W: 3 1⁄4 inches
157. Pair of Spanish colonial
emerald and gold pendants
Emeralds, gold
H: 2 ³⁄₁₆ inches
153. Sterling silver desk clock
Bulgari, Italian
Sterling silver, steel, glass; in fitted
black leather case
H: 3 1⁄2 inches
158. A gold pre-Columbian-style,
double-head charm
Gold
154. Foil-back topaz, chrysolite,
and silver tree brooch
Portuguese
Foil back topaz, chrysolite, silver
H: 4 3⁄8 inches
159. A group of loose stones
Comprising five ruby beads, one
oval opal, two oval-cut sapphires,
two baguette-cut sapphires, one
rectangular-cut emerald, one pearshaped ruby
155. Group of costume jewelry
Comprising a peridot and metal
branch brooch, a bangle, a blue bead
ear pendant, a simulated sapphire,
diamond rock crystal and white metal
clip, a simulated diamond and yellow
metal twin heart pin, a yellow metal
rabbit compact signed Flato, a silver
compact, a silver clip, a velvet purse,
unmounted tumbled turquoise,
unmounted opal, a coral bead,
a yellow metal charm
160. Emerald and gold hair barrette
Emeralds, gold
L: 1 3⁄8 inches
Doris Duke purchased the hair
barrette from Seaman Schepps on
July 1, 1954.
101
161. Ruby, opal, diamond, and gold
flower cluster
American
Rubies, opals, diamonds, gold
H: 1 1⁄2 inches
166. Pair of opal drop ear pendants
American
Opals, diamonds, enamel, gold
H: 1 1⁄4 inches
162. Carved opal and diamond crab
brooch
American, c. 1960
Carved opal, diamonds, silver, gold
H: 1 1⁄4 inches
167. Gold coin pendant
on a chain
Austrian gold coin mounted in a gold
pendant suspended from a gold box
chain
163. Cabochon ruby, cultured pearl,
and gold “puppet” brooch
Van Cleef & Arpels, New York, c. 1950
Gold, cabochon ruby, cultured pearls
H: 2 inches
168. Pre-Columbian-style gold pendant/
brooch
Gold, enamel, satin cord
H: 1 7⁄8 inches
164. Carved ruby and diamond
hummingbird pin
American
Carved cabochon rubies, diamonds,
gold, platinum
L: 1 1⁄8 inches
169. Gold-mounted lion’s claw
pendant with chain
Monet
Lion’s claw, cabochon green glass,
gold; chain-plated gold
Height of pendant: 3 5⁄8 inches
165. Ruby, diamond, and gold
elephant brooch
American, c. 1960
Gold, diamonds, rubies
L: 1 5⁄8 inches
170. Enamel bead with foliate
design
Foil-back cabochon emeralds, foilback cabochon rubies, enamel, gold
H: 1 3⁄4 inches
102
171. Pair of diamond, ruby, and
Probably Lucknow, Late 19th century
Rubies, diamonds in kundan settings,
enamel, gold
Doris Duke purchased the
bangles at Parke-Bernet Galleries
on May 15, 1969, for $700.
176. Pair of white sapphire and
enameled gold earrings
India, 19th century
White sapphires, seed pearls, enamel,
gold
D: 2 1⁄4 inches
172. Pair of diamond, pearl, and
India, Late 17th or early 18th century
Pearls, diamonds in kundan settings,
enamel, gold; inside with polychrome
enamel
enameled gold buttons
Jaipur, Early 20th century
White sapphires, enamel, gold; reverse
W: ⁹⁄₁₆ inches
173. Diamonds, emeralds, rubies,
and gold hair ornament
Probably Jaipur, 20th century
Emeralds, rubies, diamonds in kundan
settings, pearls, enamel, gold; reverse
W: 2 7⁄8 inches
enamel buttons
White sapphires, enamel, gold; reverse
W: ⁹⁄₁₆ inches
174. Pair of white sapphire, pearls,
enamel, and gold earrings
(Each originally a panel from a bracelet)
Hyderabad or Jaipur, Late 18th century
White sapphires, pearls, enamel, gold
W: 1 ³⁄₁₆ inches
179. Set of four cabochon beryl and
opal buttons
Second half of 19th century
Beryls, opals, silver
D: 1 1⁄4 inches
175. Set of seven Navaratna buttons
Jaipur, Late 19th century
Chrysoberyl, coral, blister-pearl,
diamonds, emeralds, colored glass,
gold; reverse with polychrome enamel
D: 3⁄4 inches
180. Set of white zircon buttons
India, c. 1900
White zircons, gold
103
181. Set of red stone buttons
India, c. 1900
Red stones, gold
186. Gem-set and enamel
composite pendant
Upper rosette section, early 18th century
White sapphires, gold; reverse with polychrome
enamel
Lower section, early 19th century
White sapphires, seed pearls, rubies, gold
H: 4 7⁄8 inches L: 5 inches
182. Set of five gold buttons
India, 20th century
Emeralds, rubies, diamonds, gold
187. Pair of gem-set and enameled
gold ear ornaments
Jaipur, 20th century
Colored gemstones, seed pearls, green
glass beads, enamel, gold
Doris Duke purchased the ear
ornaments at Hammer Galleries, New
York, on October 1, 1941 for $700.
183. Pair of gem-set and enamel
rigid bangles
Late 19th century
Colored gemstones, pearls, enamel,
gold
188. Pair of bracelets
India, 19th century
Beryl beads, cord
L: 6 3⁄4 inches
184. Gem-set and enamel rigid
bangle
Beryl, corundum, white sapphires,
enamel
189. Pair of diamond, seed pearl,
and enamel earrings
India, Early 20th century
Diamonds, seed pearls, enamel, gold
185. Gem-set and enamel rigid
bangle
White sapphires, diamonds, rubies,
enamel
190. Ruby and pearl shoulder
ornament
Early 20th century
Cabochon rubies, pearls, gold
L: 6 1⁄4 inches
104
191. Ruby and pearl earrings
(en suite with ruby and pearl shoulder
ornament)
Early 20th century
Cabochon rubies, pearls, gold
W: 1 inch
196. Enameled pendant perfume flask in the
form of a boteh
Jaipur, Late 19th or early 20th century
Enamel, diamonds, pearls, green glass beads, gold
H: 1 1⁄8 inches
192. Uncut emerald, ruby, and
seed pearl necklace
Uncut emeralds and rubies, seed pearls, diamonds,
enamel, gold
197. Diamond pendant necklace
India, 19th century
Diamonds, gold; reverse with
polychrome enamel
bead necklace
India, 20th century
Diamonds, freshwater pearls,
enamel, gold
198. Pair of ruby, white zircon, and
enamel rigid bangles with bird
terminals
Rubies and white zircons in kundan
settings, enamel, gold; inside with
polychrome enamel
194. Gem-set necklace
terminal panel
India, Late 19th century
Colored gemstones, gold
199. Ruby, white zircon, and
enamel rigid bangle
India, 20th century
Rubies and white zircons in kundan
settings, enamel, gold; inside with
polychrome enamel
195. Diamond and white
sapphire bead
India
Diamonds, white sapphires, rubies,
gold
H: 1 inch
200. White zircon, seed pearl,
and enamel earrings
India, 18th or 19th century
White zircons, seed pearls,
enamel, gold
L: 2 1⁄2 inches
105
201. Diamond and pearl necklace
India
Diamonds, pearls, green glass beads,
gold, cord; reverse with polychrome
enamel
Doris Duke purchased the necklace
at Gazdar Private, Ltd., in Bombay on
October 14, 1958.
206. Enamel pendant
India, 18th century
Gold, enamel, cord
202. Ruby and brass bracelet
India, 20th century
Cabochon rubies, seed pearls, brass
L: 8 3⁄4 inches
207. Pearl, white zircon, and enamel
ring
India, 19th century
White zircons, pearls, turquoise beads,
enamel, gold
203. White zircon necklace
India, Late 19th or early 20th century
White zircons, seed pearls, green glass
beads, gold; reverse with polychrome
enamel
208. Freshwater pearl
and gold bracelet
Jaipur, Late 19th century
Gold, diamonds, enamel, freshwater
pearls
long chain necklace
India, Early 20th century
Diamonds, enamel, gold woven cord
209. Gem-set bracelet
India, 20th century
Rubies, sapphires, coral, cat’s eye,
white and blue stones, enamel, gold;
L: 7 inches
205. Enamel fish necklace
India, 20th century
Diamonds, pearls, green glass beads,
enamel, gold, cord
210. Gem-set rectangular panel
India, 19th century
Diamond, emerald, ruby, sapphire,
coral, garnet, pearl, enamel, gold,
black velvet band
Doris Duke purchased the gemset panel from David Webb on
November 30, 1957. She then had
John Frederic make it into a belt.
106
211. Gem-set gold belt
India
Sapphire, white zircons, gold
L: 32 inches
216. Gold serpent ring
India
Gold
212. Gem-set earrings
India, 19th century
Cabochon rubies, diamonds, gold;
217. Three gem-set gold rings
India, 20th century
One with rubies, gold
One with ruby, gold
One with diamonds, gold
213. Pair of gem-set and gold
earrings
India, 19th century
Originally a pair of buttons, later
made into earrings by David Webb
Diamonds, colored gemstones, enamel,
gold
218. Pendant and long chain
necklace
India, 19th century
Seed pearls, colored gemstones,
enamel, gold
214. Pair of enamel ear clips
India, 20th century
Originally a pair of buttons, later
made into earrings by David Webb
White zircons, enamel, gold
219. Pair of diamond earrings
India, 19th century
Diamonds, gold, silver
L: 2 3⁄8 inches
(converted from a sarpech)
215. Three enamel and gold rings
India
Enamel, gold; one set with gemstones
220. Silver-gilt bracelet
India
L: 7 inches
107
221. Pair of silver-gilt foliate rigid
bangles
India, 20th century
Silver gilt
226. Pair of white zircon and
enamel gold bangles
India, 19th century
White zircons, enamel, gold, cord
222. Ruby and diamond gold
bangle
India
Rubies, diamonds, gold
227. Pair of gem-set ear ornaments
India, 20th century
Rubies, white zircons, seed pearls,
green glass beads, gold; reverse with
polychrome enamel
L: 4 1⁄4 inches
223. Two silver-gilt filigree bangles
India, 20th century
Silver gilt
228. Pair of gem-set ear
ornaments
India, 20th century
Rubies, white zircons, seed pearls,
red glass beads, gold; reverse with
polychrome enamel
H: 3 1⁄2 inches
224. Pair of ruby, emerald,
diamond, and pearl rigid bangles
India
Rubies, emeralds, diamonds, pearls,
gold
229.Pair of gem-set ear pendants
Southern India, 20th century
Enamel, rubies, emeralds, pearls, gold
225. Pair of emerald and diamond
earrings
Emeralds, diamonds, enamel, gold;
L: 3 inches
Doris Duke purchased the earrings
at Tula Ram, Jeweller, in Delhi on
March 30, 1957.
230. Pair of ruby and emerald
bracelets
India, 19th century
Rubies, emeralds, enamel, gold, velvet
band
L: 6 3⁄4 inches
108
231. Turquoise and gold bracelet
India, 19th century
Turquoise, gold, silk cord
L: 7 inches
236. Pair of ruby and gold
rigid bangles
India, 20th century
Rubies, gold; inside with polychrome
enamel
232. Diamond and gold bracelet
Diamonds, gold; reverse with
polychrome enamel
Length of central section: 4 1⁄2 inches
237. Pair of ruby and gold
rigid bangles
Rubies, diamonds, gold; inside with
polychrome enamel
233. A set of three gold bracelets
India, 20th century
Gold
L: 6 3⁄4 inches
238. Set of four white sapphire and
enamel rigid bangles
White sapphires, enamel, gold
234. Pair of diamond, gold, and
green glass earrings
India, 20th century
Diamonds, green glass, gold; reverse
gold necklace
India, 19th century
Diamonds, seed pearls, enamel, gold;
235. Pair of seed pearl and
enamel ear pendants
India, 20th century
Diamonds, seed pearls, green glass
beads, enamel, gold
L: 2 inches
240. Pair of ruby bead and diamond
flowerhead ear clips
India, 20th century
Ruby beads, diamonds, gold
D: 1 inch
Doris Duke purchased these ear
clips from the Parke-Bernet Galleries’
sale, “Important Jewelry Collection
of Madame Ganna Walska,”
on April 1, 1971, for $200.
109
241. Diamond and ruby gold belt
Diamonds, cabochon rubies,
emeralds, gold; coil link band
L: 27 inches
Doris Duke purchased the belt from
the Art Trading Company, New York,
on July 11, 1941, for $450.
246. Carved emerald, ruby, diamond,
and enamel pendant
India, 18th century
Carved emerald, diamonds, rubies,
gold; reverse with polychrome enamel;
silk cord
H: 1 1⁄2 inches
242. Pearl and gem-set pendant and
necklace
India, 20th century
Colored gemstones, seed pearls,
enamel, gold, cord; reverse with
polychrome enamel
247. Gold chimera bangle
India, 20th century
Gold
243. Gem-set earrings
India, 20th century
Colored gemstones, gold; reverse with
polychrome enamel
L: 3 1⁄2 inches
248. Emerald bead necklace
India, 20th century
Emerald beads, colored gemstones,
pearls, enamel, gold
244. Diamond and seed pearl fringe
necklace
India
Diamonds, pearls, seed pearls; reverse
249. Gem-set plaque link bracelet
India, 20th century
Colored gemstones, blue beads, seed
pearls, gold
L: 5 3⁄4 inches
245. Cabochon emerald, diamond and
pearl pendant
India, 19th century
Foil-back emeralds, diamonds, baroque pearl,
gold; reverse with polychrome enamel; woven
gold chain
H: 3 3⁄8 inches
250. Two gem-set and glass
pendant brooches
India, 20th century
One with red and green glass, pearls,
gold and attached to enameled bar
pin signed by Seaman Schepps
H: 3 inches
One with red and green glass, pearls,
rubies, gold
H: 2 7⁄8 inches
110
251. Diamond and gold
cluster ring
Southeast Asia
Diamonds, gold
256. Pair of red stone and
silver-gilt tassel earrings
Southeast Asia
Red stone, silver gilt
L: 3 inches
252. Gem-set silver-gilt belt
Southeast Asia, 20th century
Diamonds, colored gemstones, silver
gilt, mesh band
257. White zircon and silvergilt brooch
Southeast Asia
20th century
White zircons, silver gilt
D: 2 1⁄8 inches
253. White zircon silver-gilt belt
White zircons, silver gilt, mesh band
Length of buckle: 3 inches
Length of belt: 29 inches
258. White zircon and silvergilt floral bracelet
L: 7 inches
254. Silver-gilt belt
Southeast Asia
Silver gilt
L: 27 1⁄4 inches
259. White zircon cluster clip
Southeast Asia
H: 3 inches
255. White zircon, silver-gilt
link chain necklace
L: 51 inches
260. White zircon cluster brooch
D: 2 1⁄2 inches
111
261. White zircon armlet
L: 10 3⁄4 inches
266. Synthetic ruby and silver-gilt
long chain necklace
Southeast Asia
L: 49 inches
262. Pair of white zircon and silvergilt tassel earrings
L: 3 inches
267. Synthetic ruby and silver-gilt
wreath brooch
D: 2 inches
263. White zircon and synthetic
ruby bracelet
Southeast Asia
20th century
White zircons, synthetic rubies,
silver gilt
L: 6 1⁄4 inches
268. Synthetic ruby and silver-gilt foliate
cluster bracelet
Synthetic ruby, silver gilt
L: 6 1⁄4 inches
264. White zircon and silver-gilt,
cluster-fringe necklace
269. Synthetic ruby silver-gilt belt
Length of buckle: 3 inches
Length of belt: 31 1⁄2 inches
265. Diamond and gold pendant brooch
Diamonds, gold, woven gold link neck chain
D: 2 1⁄4 inches
270. White zircon and silver-gilt
pendant
White zircons, silver gilt, woven chain
H: 4 inches
112
271. Synthetic ruby and gilt
metal pendant
Synthetic ruby, gilt metal, woven
chain
H: 2 3⁄4 inches
275. Gem-set and gold bangle
bracelet
272. Two groups
of jewelry
Comprising Asian
metal bracelets,
coral necklaces,
turquoise necklaces,
single earrings,
buttons, links, etc.
276. Pair of gold tassel earrings
Gold
H: 1 3⁄4 inches
277. Three gold turban ornaments
Gold
Length of longest: 5 inches
273. Pair of ruby, emerald, and
diamond circular ear clips
Rubies, emeralds, diamonds, gold
D: 3⁄4 inches
278. Center section of Ottoman
diamond and gold necklace
Mid 19th century
Diamonds, gold
L: 5 inches
274. Pair of white zircon and
gold ear pendants
Southeast Asia
20th century
White zircons, silver gilt (with
a matching panel with chain
decoration)
Length of ear pendants: 2 1⁄2 inches
279. An Ottoman diamond star
and crescent brooch
Mid 19th century
Diamonds, gold
W: 11⁄2 inches
113
280. An Ottoman diamond and
gold floral spray brooch
Mid 19th century
Diamonds, gold
The central five-petal rosette is set en
tremblant, a feature of diamond jewelry
from the mid nineteenth century in
which decorative elements are set on a
tiny spring so that, when worn,
it moves or “trembles.”
H: 4 inches
285. Gold and enamel bead
necklace
Thai, 19th century
Gold, red stones, enamel
281. Silver-gilt and niello belt
Turkish, 20th century
Niello, enamel, silver gilt
Length of buckle: 2 3⁄4 inches
Length of belt: 32 1⁄2 inches
286. Gold and enamel turban pin
Thai, 19th century
Enamel, gold
L: 4 inches
282. Ruby and gold pendant
Persian or Central Asian, 16th or 17th
century
Rubies, gold, gold woven chain
287. Two Medieval gold rings
Javanese
Rubies, cat’s eye, gold
283. Gold and enameled pendant
Thai, 19th century
Diamonds, enamel, gold
288. Gem-set bracelet
Egyptian, 20th century
Amber, faience, lapis lazuli, silver
L: 8 3⁄4 inches
marriage ring
Thai, 19th century
Gold, rubies, enamel
289. Pair of jade bangles
China
114
290. Miniature green jade
gu-form vase
China
Jade
H: 5 7⁄8 inches
294. Gem-set hair pin
291. Miniature dark green
jade altar garniture
China
Comprising a censer and cover, a pair
of gu-form beaker vases, and a pair of
pricket candlesticks.
Height: 5 inches
295. Cameo bracelet
Shell, gold
L: 75⁄8 inches
292. Gem-set hair ornament
296. Pair of doll’s gold buckles
and parts of two other items
Siam
Emeralds, rubies, diamonds, chased
gold
Siam
H: 4 inches
Gold, diamonds
293. Gem-set hair ornaments
Siam
Colored gemstones, gilt metal
H: 1 inch
115

The Doris Duke Jewelry Collection

Transcription

Similar documents

From Markmans

Holiday Bazaar - Wayzata Schools

Robert Been - Chiricahua Gallery

Celebrity Guests

`Twas the week before Christmas, and all through the city, the Santa

TO BEDAZZLER - Jewelry by Fran Green

yobel scm

Cozumel - Proszowski.com

FIONA`S TREASURE TROVE

Florida Keys Jewelry