Talk:Crown Jewels of the United Kingdom

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Crown Jewels of the United Kingdom is included in the 2007 Wikipedia for Schools, or is a candidate for inclusion in future versions. Please maintain high quality standards, and make an extra effort to include free images, because non-free images cannot be used on the CDs.
British Royalty This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Royalty (a child project of the Royalty and Nobility Work Group), an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to British Royalty on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you should visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]


Is "Crown Jewels of the United Kingdom" strictly correct? I don't think the jewels are owned by the state. They are like the Royal residences, held by the monarch in perpetuity to be passed down to to her heirs. Mintguy 03:18, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I did not seek to indicate that the Crown Jewels were owned by the country, just that they are of that nation. Perhaps British Crown Jewels would be better? -- Lord Emsworth 13:33, Dec 31, 2003 (UTC)

both the residences and jewels are owned by the nation, just held in trust by the monarch. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.26.99.176 (talk) 00:31, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Photos would help improve this article

I'm surprised at the lack of any photos of the regalia in the article.

 It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.

Wikipedians in London may be able to help!
The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Carnth (talk) 23:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Identifying English Coronation Regalia

Found a nice image of the English Coronation Regalia: Image:EnglishCoronationRegalia.jpg I just don't know for sure what is what. If anybody knows, please add the info to the image page. Sources may be for example [1] Thanks -- Chris 73 | Talk 01:01, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] 2nd world war

on the fort knox page it says they were kept there in the second world war, on this page it says in canada.

Which one? or both?

The US Mint also claims this: http://www.usmint.gov/about_the_mint/fun_facts/index.cfm?flash=yes&printer=no&action=fun_facts13

I was just going to ask that. "During World War II the depository also held the..British crown jewels" it says on that page. Astrokey44 13:33, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] WWII

According to several sources I've spoke with (Historians, University Professors) Fort Knox was the holding point during WWII. Personally I seriously doubt they'd entrust such valuable items to a vault in the basement of a Life Insurance company—however entrusting them to Fort Knox, which is one of (if not the most) secure ground-level vaults in the world, sounds more than reasonable.


A document (LEC, Fort Knox, KY. Soldier Study Guide) says:

"The U.S. Treasury Department began construction of the U.S. Bullion Depository. It first opened in January 1937. The Gold Vault was used to store and to safeguard the English Crown Jewels and the Magna Carta (the Great Charter, which dates back to the 13th century). On December 26, 1941, the Gold Vault also received the original documents of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence. These documents left Fort Knox on October 1, 1944, and were returned to Washington, D.C. for public display."


Other links supporting they were there (say the same thing, so probably sourced from each other or another common one):

mdnky 7 December 2005

That one is pretty simple to shoot down. The original Magna Carta has been lost and there are in fact 4 copies of identical age. so it makes no sense to store it in Fort Knox. There simply is no document in existance that can be refured to as the Magna Carta.Geni 20:24, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

seems unlikely, if anything it would of been sent with the bullion to canada, but i'm pretty sure it was stored with the art and museum pieces.

[edit] Resoureces

What resources were used in this article


[edit] Trivia

The film mentioned in the text is obscure and, well, trivial. Anybody mind if I delete? Notreallydavid 06:08, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Go for it, it doesn't add anything to the article. FiggyBee 12:55, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Imperial Crown of India

The article about it says it isn't part of the jewels, just stored with them. Someone should make that consistant.--SidiLemine 17:00, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Original sources of the jewels

This article doesn't discuss any of the sources of the crown jewels... certainly there must be some information available about some of them, correct?

http://www.expressindia.com/news/ie/daily/20000630/ied30057.html

"In the last session of Parliament, Rajya Sabha MP, Kuldip Nayar, along with a group of 25 parliamentarians raised the demand for the return of the Koh-i-Noor diamond, which is part of the crown jewels of the British Queen"

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/the-jewel-in-the-crown-the-curse-of-kohinoor-430100.html

"The diamond was war booty and its delivery was to be a spectacle carried out in much the same manner as the tribute paid by defeated enemies of Egyptian pharaohs and Roman emperors. It was the centrepiece of the Great Exhibition of 1851, attracting thousands of visitors."

[edit] Value

any idea of the rough value? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.26.99.176 (talk) 00:28, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Well if they're the symbols of the United Kingdom, then... the GDP of the United Kingdom? Heh. Technically speaking though, aren't they valueless (in financial terms)? Simply because if a thing's value is determined by how much people are willing to cough up for it, non-transferable items can't really be said to have a value, unless you take them apart and sell the metal and gems as separate items. Leushenko (talk) 02:03, 5 March 2008 (UTC)