Shown in the photograph is Queen Mary (1867-1953), grandmother of Queen Elizabeth II. Queen Mary was a manic collector of jewelry and other fine pieces. During the reign of her husband, King George V (1865-1936), she vastly expanded the Royal Collection, often from the houses of friends. Mary is shown here wearing “the Girls of Great Britain and Ireland Tiara” which is also referred to as “Granny’s Tiara,” which she gave to Elizabeth in 1947, the year she married Prince Philip.
Queen Mary got it wrong. One is supposed to “love people and use things.” She did the very opposite. Mary loved things and used people. The Queen had an “emotional lurch of the heart when she saw beautiful jewels,” but hated to pay for them. On seeing something she coveted, she said, “I’m caressing it with my eyes.” But it didn’t stop there. She acquired jewels, furniture, Faberge animals, watches, and gold musical boxes by means that ranged from begging to extortion to outright theft. She loved to visit India where the “maharajas handed out jewels like blackberries.” (1)
One day Queen Mary almost met her match. She was taking tea one late afternoon with Old Lady Hudson. The Queen began admiring a set of chairs that belonged to Lady Hudson. The chairs were painted by Angelica Kauffman. The Queen remarked that Lady Hudson’s chairs would go splendidly with the Kauffman table she owned. Lady Hudson no doubt smiled but did not offer her chairs to Queen Mary. The clock ticked on. Queen Mary continued to sip her tea. The sun went down. Queen Mary still showed no sign of getting up and departing.
More time passed. Finally, when the clock struck nine o’clock, Lady Hudson capitulated. She had held on valiantly, but, at the end, she was an old woman and she was ready for the Queen to go home. So ”the chairs went off in the royal Daimler.” (1)
At times, when Queen Mary wasn’t given something she desired, it is rumored she went ahead and stole it.
In the early 20th Century, wearing expensive jewelry was a way of defining status and Queen Mary was all about defining status – her status – as an elevated member of society. She was born the daughter of two royals who frittered away their money, infuriating their benefactress Queen Victoria, resulting in the whole family being tossed out of their apartments at Kensington Palace and run out of London. Mary ended up studying in Italy. Years passed and Mary returned to England. Queen Victoria cast her eye about looking for a suitable spouse for her grandson George, second in line for the throne. She selected Princess Mary, seeing in her “queen potential.” Upon the death of King Edward VII in 1910, George ascended the throne and Mary became his Queen.
Queen Mary with granddaughters, the Princess Margaret Rose and the future Queen Elizabeth II
Mary then set about to fulfill the potential seen in her by Queen Victoria and to become as royal as royal could be. She proceeded to outdazzle the royals around her, projecting such a flawless image of majesty that, to many, she ceased to be human. She was so decorated and gem-encrusted that, “at Lord Harewood’s wedding, a myopic E.M. Forster bowed to the iced and many-tiered cake under the impression that it was Queen Mary.” (1)
Queen Mary was so busy collecting, carrying out her royal duties, and hobnobbing with nobility that she had little time for motherhood, though she had borne six children. She had no passion for them. She left their care to cruel servants who pinched them. She did not kiss, cuddle, or hug her children. They were all starved of love, particularly her youngest child, John, born handicapped and epileptic. He was hidden away in a cottage with caregivers until his death at fourteen.
Upon her death from lung cancer in 1953, her son, David, Duke of Windsor, the former King Edward VIII, remarked:
I somehow feel that the fluids in her veins must always have been as icy-cold as they now are in death.
This actually reminds me of one of your recent posts on Mary Todd Lincoln. You always seem to find the greatest quotes, too – the final one from David, Duke of Windsor, really sums up an aspect of this woman I would never have thought about.
The similar post is “Mary Todd Lincoln Had the Gimmies.” The two Marys had delusions of grandeur. In psychology circles it’s called grandiosity – a feature of mania. Thank you so much for the compliments. Queen Mary’s coldness to her son David is largely what drew him to suffocatingly controlling women like Wallis Warfield Simpson. He wanted desperately to be mothered – at any age.
After reading this article, I feel that I really need more information on the topic. Could you share some resources ?
Thanks for visiting. There are umpteen thousand books written on the Windsor dynasty. Here are some recommendations:
The Windsors: A Dynasty Revealed by Piers Brendon and Phillip Whitehead
The Royals by Kitty Kelley
The Windsor Story by J. Bryan III and Charles J.V. Murphy
http://members.tripod.com/windsor_women/id25.htm
Mary of Teck in Wikipedia
http://www.divasthesite.com/Political_Divas/Trivia/Trivia_Queen_Mary.htm
Why don’t you try reading a factual book like Pope-Hennessy’s biography of Queen Mary instead of the silly scuttlebuck mentioned above. It is as fashionable now to derogate monarachy as it once was to fawn upon it. Perhaps the truth lies somewhere in between?
Hi, Peter. You seem angry about something in the Queen Mary article. In disagreements between history lovers, it’s usually best to lay out on the table what you disagree with. Please let me know on what point you differ. I’m very, very, very careful about selecting facts about people that can be verified through reputable sources. If you will read my credentials, you will see that I’ve been published by Texas Tech University Press and have prepared historical materials for the University of Texas, Harcourt Educational Publishers, and many other respectable publishers. I take great pride in presenting history in my books and articles as well as my blog post that is thoroughly fact-checked to be historically accurate.
You mention that I should read something like Pope-Hennessy’s biography of Queen Mary instead of “the silly scuttlebuck mentioned here.” Did you mean “scuttlebutt” or rumor? I can’t find scuttlebuck in my dictionaries.
The book I used for the post on Queen Mary is cited and is a thoroughly respected, highly researched, annotated to death biography of the Windsor Dynasty. Are you familiar with it ?
As for Queen Mary, she was an ice cube who cared only for material possessions. Period. There are no 2 ways of looking at it, however hard it is for someone to swallow. Check out Lord Harewood’s biography.
You are welcome to visit Lisa’s History Room but please resist throwing barbs. All my best, Lisa
Hi, Peter. I wanted to mention that I had considered using the Pope-Hennessy bio of Queen Mary for my research but decided against it as a credible resource when I read two things: Number one: It is the official biography of Queen Mary.
Number two: P-H was created Commander of the Royal Victorian Order in 1960 after the publication of QM’s bio.
Biographies commissioned by royal families that result in awards usually are written as hagiographies and are thus untrustworthy as sources of facts, i.e., the royal family vetted the book so that it presented a favorable picture of them.
why was quuen Mary such a theft an such cruel to people she didnt even know but jus wanted stuff she saw but did not need… imi glade in dont live in UK an i am glade i wasnt there doing her time
Nicely said, Lisa! I agree with you! The “Windsor” family has a habit of taking things–like their name! They adopted the name to distance them from their German origins and, in my opinion, they had no right to the throne. Regardless of whether the aristocracy continues to be tolerated or is abolished, they are just overindulged egomaniacs at this point. Though Mary is an excellent example of their selfish and disrespectful sense of entitlement and lack of affection for their children, Princess Margaret most definitely blew right past her to top the list! She might have been second in line for the throne as a child but she topped the list of royal mooches! She should have been knocked on her royal scuttle-BUTT for her behavior many times but, since she was “a Royal”, no one dared to stand up to her. They’re one of the wealthiest families in the world yet they expect to be given everything they fancy without question –pathetic, isn’t it?
Vonya, your comment on the Windsor name is perfect. Our view of the British royalty is obviously not shared by the Brits. They pay a fortune to keep their Queen, etc., in high clover.
I personally challange you to prove where Her Majesty Queen Mary ever stole anything! By aristocratic standanrds, Princess Mary of Teck (later Queen Mary of Grat Britain and Ireland, Impress of India) was born into a family that owned little more that a royal title. She made a marriage based on love as opposed to diplomatic, which was the norm in her day. True, she loved jewels; she could afford them; and she should have them! Unless you can prove that our Queen actually stole something, then you are just a bald face lie!
I’ve cited sources so you may investigate my claims. I do not care for your incivility in calling me a name. Please don’t visit Lisa’s History Room unless you are prepared to read the truth. I do not hero worship here.
Lisa,
I enjoy your website, but I have a question about Queen Mary’s kleptomania: Was it also possible that she collected items that once belonged to the Royal Collection. I understand that she put a some work into researching catalogs of items and securing thier return. And, is it not them possible, despite her possibly persuading people to give up things along the way, that Queen-Imperatrix consort was also a curatrix, too?
Thanks!
Apollo, here’s what Wikipedia says about Queen Mary (May of Teck):
“Queen Mary was an eager collector of objects and pictures with a royal connection.She paid above-market estimates when purchasing jewels from the estate of Dowager Empress Marie of Russia and paid almost three times the estimate when buying the family’s Cambridge Emeralds from Lady Kilmorey, the mistress of her late brother Prince Francis. In 1924, the famous architect Sir Edwin Lutyens created Queen Mary’s Dolls’ House for her collection of miniature pieces. Indeed, she has sometimes been criticised for her aggressive acquisition of objets d’art for the Royal Collection. On several occasions, she would express to hosts, or others, that she admired something they had in their possession, in the expectation that the owner would be willing to donate it. Her extensive knowledge of, and research into, the Royal Collection helped in identifying artefacts and artwork that had gone astray over the years.The Royal Family had lent out many objects over previous generations. Once she had identified unreturned items through old inventories, she would write to the holders, requesting that they be returned.”
[...] there. Didn't want to offend them by rubbing it in their faces. Here's what I mean about Mary: Queen Elizabeth Anyway, judging from the video, it's all such a financial tangle now that the family will probably [...]
Even with all the distasteful things that she has done as a person, Queen Mary guided the British people through difficult times. Her firm belief in duty also saved the British Monarchy from demise. The British saw her as a pillar of their nation, especially during the abdication crisis.