On 10 December 2008 in the Jewels sale at Christie's, King Street in London, an historically significant blue diamond sold for a record breaking (at the time) price of GBP 16.4 million (USD 24.3 million). The cushion-shaped Fancy Deep Grayish Blue diamond, then known as the Wittelsbach Diamnond, carried a deep and rich 300 year history in the Spanish and Bavarian Royal families, belonging to Princesses, Kings, and Holy Roman Emperors. Weighing 35.56 carats and graded by GIA as having a VS2 (Very Slightly Included) clarity, it was purchased by a well known name in the jewelry industry, Mr. Lawrence Graff. Soon after the sale, Mr. Graff announced his decision to re-polish (cutting and resurfacing) the diamond which resulted in a 4.45 carat reduction (now at 31.06 carats) but with an upgrade to the color and clarity at the more desirable grade of IF (Internally Flawless) and Fancy Deep Blue. This major change also meant an alteration to the diamond's name, now known as the "Wittelsbach-Graff Diamond."
A Rich History
Suspected to be unearthed from the mines in the ancient Kingdom of Golconda in Hyderabad State in India, the diamond shares its origins with such famous stones as the Hope Diamond (45.53 cts., Fancy Dark Grayish Blue, VS1), the Koh-i-Noor Diamond (186 cts, White), the Darya-ye Noor Diamond (182 cts., Pale Pink), and the Regent Diamond (140.64 cts., White/Pale Blue). All of these stones are reported to have been found around 17th Century, during the time when India was the worldwide diamond source.
The Wittelsbach-Graff diamond traces its lore to King Phillip IV of Spain. When his teenage daughter, the Infanta Margarita Teresa, was betrothed to Leopold I of Austria, he assembled a collection of fine gems for her dowry which included the mesmerizing blue stone. After her untimely death in 1673 at the tender age of 21, her husband kept the dowry, ultimately passing the diamond to his third wife, who then bequeathed it to her granddaughter, Archduchess Maria Amalia in 1720. When the Archduchess married the Bavarian Crown Prince, Charles Albert, the blue diamond gained the house name of Wittelsbach as well as the moniker "Der Blaue Wittlesbacher." Subsequently passed down through further generations, the stone would ultimately come into the hands of Maximillian IV Joseph von Wittelsbach, the first King of Bavaria. He commissioned a crown in 1806 to include the blue diamond and family heirloom, where it remained until 1918 after the proclamation of the Republic.
In 1931 Christie's auction house offered a sale of important jewelry from the Bavarian Crown Jewels which included the Wittelsbach Diamond. After the sale the diamond's whereabouts have become somewhat of a mystery, entering into the hands of an unknown family and not returning to the public sphere until the recent sale in 2008. There was a brief moment in the 1960s where the diamond was brought to a well known jeweler to be recut under the pretense that it was merely an old mine cut stone. After recognizing the significance of the diamond and its history, the jeweler refused to alter such an important piece and instead joined together with several other jewelers to purchase the stone where it remained until 2008.
The Controversy
The Wittelsbach-Graff diamond traces its lore to King Phillip IV of Spain. When his teenage daughter, the Infanta Margarita Teresa, was betrothed to Leopold I of Austria, he assembled a collection of fine gems for her dowry which included the mesmerizing blue stone. After her untimely death in 1673 at the tender age of 21, her husband kept the dowry, ultimately passing the diamond to his third wife, who then bequeathed it to her granddaughter, Archduchess Maria Amalia in 1720. When the Archduchess married the Bavarian Crown Prince, Charles Albert, the blue diamond gained the house name of Wittelsbach as well as the moniker "Der Blaue Wittlesbacher." Subsequently passed down through further generations, the stone would ultimately come into the hands of Maximillian IV Joseph von Wittelsbach, the first King of Bavaria. He commissioned a crown in 1806 to include the blue diamond and family heirloom, where it remained until 1918 after the proclamation of the Republic.
In 1931 Christie's auction house offered a sale of important jewelry from the Bavarian Crown Jewels which included the Wittelsbach Diamond. After the sale the diamond's whereabouts have become somewhat of a mystery, entering into the hands of an unknown family and not returning to the public sphere until the recent sale in 2008. There was a brief moment in the 1960s where the diamond was brought to a well known jeweler to be recut under the pretense that it was merely an old mine cut stone. After recognizing the significance of the diamond and its history, the jeweler refused to alter such an important piece and instead joined together with several other jewelers to purchase the stone where it remained until 2008.
Since the original cutting of the Wittelsbach, technology and methodology of diamond cutting has certainly improved. In addition, and contrary to popular belief, a diamond is not indestructible; under certain conditions a diamond can indeed chip and gain undesirable blemishes. Mr. Graff, a leader in the gem profession, claims that the decision to re-surface the diamond was to remove the damage caused over the years, and to increase the clarity, color, and of course the monetary value of the stone. While he did achieve this goal, many Art Historians, collectors and members of the Jewelry industry alike were outraged at the alteration of such a historic piece.
Daniela Mascetti, a Senior Specialist in Jewelry at Sotheby's said, "the provenance of a gem is important in ways that are not true of other things. With the Wittelsbach blue, you knew how it came into existence and in a rather exciting way. You know who has worn it, what kinds of historical events it has gone through and what social upheavals it was present for. In a way, it is a shame to have altered what has been preserved for som many years. Do you still have the original stone found by Tavernier or cut in his time? Will that stone still be the Wittelsbach? In my opinion, it is not."
Hans Ottomeyer, Director of Berlin's German Historical Museum remarked that the cutting was akin to "buying a Rembrandt and repainting it." By cutting the diamond, the loss of the marks acquired during its history have also removed the diamond's connection to it's history. It is not the same diamond.
Mr. Graff's response to such claims was, "If you discovered a Leonardo da Vinci with a tear in it and covered in mud, you would want to repair it. We have similarly cleaned up the diamond and repaired damage caused over the years." Mr. Graff believes in the restoration of the stone. The market value certainly has increased based on color, cut, and clarity, at a loss to the carat weight. He possibly believes the value is in the stone itself, not necessarily the historical significance.
So the question is this: If you purchase an historically significant piece of artwork or an artifact, what is your duty to that piece? To society? After the purchase, does it belong to you fully, without any requirement of preservation of that piece, or are you it's custodian; the guardian of its legacy?
What are we bound to protect as a society? What belongs to us after a purchase? Should these pieces be allowed to be purchased by private hands?
The conversation will undoubtedly continue.
No comments:
Post a Comment