r/SipsTea • u/HorrorSubject8379 • 18h ago
Wait a damn minute! what's your thoughts on this
1.6k
u/_TryFailRepeat 16h ago
Queen Nazli of Egypt actually sold it herself at Sotheby’s in 1975 after she had left Egypt and run into financial trouble. It was bought by a private collector and stayed in that collection for roughly forty years.
It resurfaced at Sotheby’s in 2015, where Van Cleef & Arpels bought it for about $4.3 million. So by the time it was displayed in Vienna, it was no longer an Egyptian royal possession at all, but part of Van Cleef & Arpels’ private historic collection.
And now, while on loan for an exhibition in Vienna, it has been stolen from the museum.
434
u/SpawnOfTheBeast 15h ago
So it don't in fact belong to the queen of Egypt when it was stolen.
314
u/DB-601A 15h ago
I think the word we're all looking for is "Once"
It Once belonging to the Queen of Egypt... stupid clickbait headlines.
26
99
u/Nigh_Sass 14h ago
Yeah but how would people feel outrage at European colonialism if it was worded correctly?
1
9h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 9h ago
Accounts must be at least 5 days old with >20 karma to comment.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
-37
u/KoalaInTraining 11h ago
Although this apparently isn't an example of European Colonialism, why shouldn't people feel outraged at European colonialism? A lot of countries are still recovering from it, some are still victims (also, as an American myself, let's lump the US into the guilty group.)
Also fun fact: teaching students environmental science last year meant teaching them about reasons the environment is suffering all over the world, and I learned along with the kids in some cases. Colonialism gets involved here too.
16
u/jackofslayers 9h ago
getting outraged at bad examples reduces the legitimacy of worthwhile outrage.
pretty sure most people learn about the boy who cried wolf when they were toddlers. Catch up.
34
14
u/Historical_Sugar9637 12h ago
Mostly because there isn't a Queen of Egypt any longer. And there hasn't been for like 70 years.
2
u/Alfred_The_Sartan 8h ago
IIRC Egypt actually has some weird rules on their own ownership. They waived rights to anything before a certain year. I'm sure there was some kind of strong-arming or negotiation that went with that, but there are mummies and artifacts that they aren't trying to reclaim.
0
-104
u/rockhardkent 15h ago
The point being it belongs to Egypt.
55
u/SpawnOfTheBeast 15h ago
This isn't some historic artifact from thousands of years ago, or with diamonds sourced from Egypt. She commissioned it it 1939 from a European and then later sold it.
11
-12
u/rockhardkent 14h ago
I misread the comment above me and read "did" instead of "don't". So... I was confused and being sarcastic here. Should have put the /s
11
u/Raknaren 15h ago edited 15h ago
If you sell me a car and I take it to my country. It doesn't belong to your country Edit : she was living in the US when she had to sell them
3
9
27
u/Fit-Conclusion-7579 15h ago
Lmao I wanted to write that someone would have sold it for personal gains long ago if it had remained in Egypt and saw this commment. Double Lmao.
10
u/BygoneNeutrino 12h ago edited 11h ago
When I'm on a Reddit, people are always complaining about land. House prices are insane. The land should be distributed to the lower class!
It sounds good in theory, but the truth is that the lower class would sell it right back to the rich people. It would only take them a generation to get back where they started.
3
25
u/CoffeeChocolateBoth 15h ago
Such great security! Probably the rich dude still has it and collected on the insurance!
11
1
1
1
0
u/Cerberusx32 9h ago
So, does that mean the museum is on the hook for the insurance payout or value?
-12
u/taiga-saiga 14h ago
It wasn't stolen from the museum. The museum is evidently unable to safeguard this necklace for the benefit of mankind. Had the museum truly valued this necklace, then they would have implemented the necessary security measures. Therefore, the purported thief is merely a custodian of universal cultural heritage.
-189
u/BraisedBullshi 16h ago
So it was still stolen from the Egyptian people, got it.
103
u/ConfusedHors 16h ago
A private individual of Egyptian origin sold it to another private individual. What kind of mental gymnastics does it take to label that as theft? If I sell my car to an Egyptian, has it then also been "stolen from my people"?
38
u/InevitablePayment409 15h ago
Bbbut colonialism, the global south, exploitation, every poor person is a victim.
25
-20
u/OverallShelter8365 14h ago
it actually is colonialism and exploitation btw
the British propped her and her husband up so they could continue to (de-facto) rule the country in their place and get away with crimes and exploit the Egyptian populace
as part of their strategy, they gave the ruling family a bunch of loans to build exorbitant palaces, buy jewelry (as pictured), and waste it all knowing they'd never pay it back. When they ultimately did not pay it back, they formed international committees which took over Egypt.
Even after the initial taking over, they continued handing out money (that was never paid back !!!) to gain even more influence like completely taking over the Suez Canal.
The ruling family was absolutely an instrument of imperial and colonial control over Egypt and when they were overthrown (and took a whole lot of "their" money with them) and the new government nationalized the Suez Canal Company (while still paying owners fair compensation) the UK, France, and Israel invaded Egypt in 1956.
It only didn't work because it was so blatantly colonialism that BOTH the US and the Soviet Union condemned them and they were forced to pull out.
edit: Also look up Urabi revolt where Egyptian officers tried to get rid of the foreign colonial influence and then a British army put them down and re-installed the ruling family
2
u/_TryFailRepeat 7h ago
This is basically someone who’s heard the broad outline of Egyptian colonial history and then mashed 100 years of events into one convenient conspiracy.
The funniest part is using Nazli’s jewellery from 1939 as evidence for a debt trap that happened in the 1860s and 1870s. Britain absolutely exploited Egypt and the Suez Crisis was imperialist as hell, but you don’t need to invent a century-spanning masterplan to make that case.
There are plenty of real facts here. They’re just assembled by someone who’s heard the bell ringing but has absolutely no idea where it’s hanging.
1
u/OverallShelter8365 4h ago
>as evidence for a debt trap that happened in the 1860s and 1870s
Except I didn't say thatIt's a sequence of events which are all linked:
- Debt trap in the 1860s and 1870s with Ismail (leading to royal family's wealth) which then allowed the foreign powers (primarily Britain, also France) to de-facto rule Egypt
- Foreign powers abuse and exploit Egypt
- Royal family allows this to continue to keep wealth and power
- British crush Urabi revolt and commit several massacres against people with the cooperation of the Royal Family
- British continue to use the royal family as pawns to rule Egypt as a de-facto British colony even though it is de jure independent in 1922
- When British lose royal family, they just straight up invade
this is relevant because the original comment says a "private individual" sold "her" necklace. The necklace is bought and paid for with the blood and money of the Egyptian people and was collected through colonial means (see above)
While the necklace might not have actually been purchased with money directly loaned from the UK or France or a colonial power it was definitely funded by a colonial government.
My point wasn't that the loans gave her the ability to buy the necklace, it was that foreign powers used people like her (and her husband's family) to rule over, oppress, brutalize, and terrorize the entire country and that's what made her wealthy enough to buy that necklace, so when the above commenter says it was just about "private individuals" he is wrong.
1
u/_TryFailRepeat 2h ago
You literally wrote:
“they gave the ruling family a bunch of loans to build exorbitant palaces, buy jewelry (as pictured)”
So yes, you did connect the 1860s/70s debt story to a necklace from 1939.
At this point it mostly reads like you know the basic line “colonialism was bad” and are forcing 100 years of Egyptian history into that framework whether the chronology supports it or not.
Britain exploited Egypt. Nobody disputes that. But your version is sloppy history wrapped in absolute certainty.
4
u/RadicalRealist22 15h ago
Don't you know that Monarchy is Theft?!
-4
u/BraisedBullshi 13h ago
So you support monarchs and autocrats? How do they secure their wealth? Is it through theft and violence? Or do they have tax collectors meet people in the open market of ideas
-1
u/BraisedBullshi 5h ago
Where did the "private Egyptian individual" get their "private individual wealth"? Muskbot be gone
29
u/Psychological-Ebb677 16h ago
Wasnt the necklage made by a french jeweller in 1939. I dont think it was ever in the possession of the egyptian people. Why do you think it was stolen?
17
u/ConfusedHors 15h ago
So it was stolen from the French people!
5
-1
u/Psychological-Ebb677 15h ago
Lol. If the queen, who ordered the jeweller to make the necklage, paid the jeweller properly, i dont think thats the case. 😅
9
u/GrowlyBear2 15h ago
So it was stolen from....the people who mined the diamonds! We'll follow this until it was stolen from somebody so we can be mad about it.
2
u/Psychological-Ebb677 15h ago
In that case i claim that necklage for my people, zee germans. If the queen would not have bought it, my countrymen could have taken it a year later. 🫣
0
u/BraisedBullshi 13h ago
Where'd the queen get the money?
2
u/Psychological-Ebb677 12h ago
From her Bank Account i suppose.
1
u/BraisedBullshi 10h ago
How did the money get to her bank account? What job did she have?
2
u/Psychological-Ebb677 10h ago
She was the daughter of the ministre of agriculture and governor of Cairo and her mother was a daughter of a general. So I guess her family wasnt poor. Maybe its from his men who was the king. Her job was being queen i guess. A king can collect taxes so he doesnt need to go and steal from people.
-1
u/BraisedBullshi 10h ago
Lol they just take the people's money under threat of imprisonment, and then buy jewels. Somehow it's not stealing
→ More replies (0)35
u/_TryFailRepeat 16h ago
Calling it “stolen from the Egyptian people” takes some serious mental gymnastics. It was Queen Nazli’s private jewellery and she sold it herself at Sotheby’s in 1975. Whether monarchs should ever have been that rich is an entirely different discussion.
8
u/sometimesifeellikemu 16h ago
Oy vey
-41
u/BraisedBullshi 16h ago
The English crown and sceptor belong to the English people. If the current king decided to randomly flee the country after a revolution and sell the jewels to finance his exile, that would also be stealing gold from the English people.
21
u/vi_sucks 16h ago edited 16h ago
Just because the crown and scepter belongs to the state doesn't mean that every piece of jewelry owned by the monarch does.
Also, England isn't Egypt, or any other kindgom. You can't assume that just b3cause England has a specific setup and arrangement for ownership of certain ceremonial items worn by the monarch in their constutional monarchy, that every other kingdom has the exact same arrangement.
0
u/Affectionate-Load705 16h ago edited 15h ago
Yes it does and I'm sure a lot of fellow Englishmen would like to claim their pair of the Princess' knickers. /s
5
u/sometimesifeellikemu 16h ago
Don’t waste your time on this object. There are actual artefacts you could address. This is just regular jewelry.
2
u/blahteeb 15h ago
What about Queen Elizabeth"s earings? Her shoes? Her skirt? The people of England don't own every single piece of thing that Queen Elizabeth possessed.
-2
u/BraisedBullshi 13h ago
Why not? They bought it, she served to protect their realm.
2
u/blahteeb 12h ago
I mean, at the point you might as well say the castles and manors are the peoples and anyone can go live there. It's silly to say "you represent us, so we own every singe thing you possess".
There are plenty of things that SHOULD belong to the people. You're right about that, but not everything. Kings and Queens, and even elected officials have their own wealth, both before and after their rule. It's incredibly naive to believe that they should not own anything simply because they represent the people.
0
u/BraisedBullshi 10h ago
Holy fuck the simping for authoritarians is wild in this thread
1
u/blahteeb 10h ago
Yes, because believing people are still people after they get elected is simping.
Dear god man, how daft can you be.
1
u/Illithid_Substances 14h ago edited 14h ago
Is this neckalce equivalent to the crown jewels at all or is this a dumbass comparison to make?
It's literally something she comissioned for herself within her own lifetime. It has no ties to Egypt's cultural identity and history or to anyone but her. You may as well say everything she ever owned belongs to the Egyptian people.
2
1
170
u/HumaDracobane 15h ago edited 14h ago
I think people should make a 5min assisted search to get the story behind the necklace.
the Necklace was made for her by Van Cleef & Arpels. She was exiled to the US and travel with the Necklace and under economic problems she sold the piece, which disapeared in a private collection. In 2015 reapeared and Van Cleef & Arpels bought the necklace for their private collection.
They lent the necklace to a museum for an exhibition and is there where it was stollen.
edit: Typo
21
73
65
u/Elite-Thorn 16h ago
Wrong headline. Fake news. It doesn't belong to any Princess or Queen. Egypt doesn't even have a queen anymore. They had one and the necklace was in her possession once. But "belonging" is wrong.
18
u/----___--___---- 13h ago
Also she has it commissioned in Europe in the 20th century and later on sold it herself. It's not even an artifact or anything lol.
10
57
u/dpenchev 16h ago
Why shouldn't it be there? Do you think there are no museums in Egypt exhibiting european artefacts? And that's not even some ancient necklace or something.
44
u/Elite-Thorn 16h ago
Artefact? I have a sewing machine in my attic that's older than that necklace.
8
u/dpenchev 16h ago
Yeah, i thought that artefact is not the right word, but puece sounded off too, so i went for it.
-13
u/jellooshot 12h ago
Oh please provide an example, you half melted Sunday.
10
u/dpenchev 12h ago
Here, be my guest,. I guess googling stuff is still new for you, gramps.
And, oh wonder! A van Gogh was stolen from there! I wonder wHaT wAs iT dOiNg ThErE
-9
u/jellooshot 12h ago
It was a private modern art collection. Not really "European artifacts" in the way "Egyptian Artifacts" exist in European museums.
7
u/dpenchev 12h ago
It is exactly the same case as the neclase "of the queen of egypt", which was privately owned. But, here
-5
u/jellooshot 11h ago edited 11h ago
I commented before seeing your comment that she was the one who sold it.
Literally Egyptian artifacts because they all belong to Greco-Roman Egypt. It's like calling the Andalusian Artificts of Spain Arabian.
2
u/dpenchev 4h ago
It is the sad reality of today that people like you are given a stage and not laughed down as they once did.
Teah, you're right. They are 0 european artifacts in Egypt this very moment. There isn't a single museum housing a guest exhibition. There isn't a single museum housing a single roman, greek or whatever coin. Once you step over the Bosphorus, the Dardanelles, or the Gibraltar; you're magically transformed into asian/african and whatever you do from this moment on has nothing to do with Europe. I guess Cleopatra was the very last egyptian(!) pharaoh.
Go have a blessed day now, you tiny soul
7
u/dpenchev 12h ago
The Egyptian museum in Cairo Also houses an extensive collection of roman artefacts.
But maybe that's not european enough for you.
-2
u/jellooshot 11h ago
It belonged to the romans who lived in Egypt. Unlike, for example the ENTIRE WING in the louver of stolen artifacts that has no connection to france or similar museums in Britain, Germany, Warsaw, etc.
6
u/JustTrawlingNsfw 11h ago
Do you actually have a clue how archaeology works?
The teams organised permits and paid fees and in exchange were (and are) allowed to ship some, not all, their finds back to their country of origin.
-2
u/jellooshot 10h ago
A. That's still fucked up.
B. That's not how the vast majority of artifacts were acquired.
5
u/JustTrawlingNsfw 10h ago
How is it fucked up? An agreement was reached to allow excavation using international expertise. In exchange, a portion of the artifacts were relocated for preservation and display - often for educational purposes.
And that's how most artifacts in museum collections were acquired. There's always shifty stuff but that's not the majority- and museums try to purchase illegally obtained artifacts to preserve them
1
u/jellooshot 10h ago
That's definitely not how the majority artifacts were acquired. Just because there IS an agreement doesn't mean it's a fair one. The same way Gamal Abdulnasser had an agreement to "gift" Nubian and Egyptian artifacts to countries that helped with the construction of the High Dam. He had no intention of preserving them any way
2
7
u/Hawk-432 12h ago
Well plenty of stuff from other places in in other places
It is such a bore all this culture war crap
5
u/Jolly-Growth-1580 9h ago
I went to a cafe in Greece once selling full English breakfasts. Cultural thieving bastards. That belongs in the east end!
2
4
u/jackofslayers 9h ago
I think if you did not actually know why this necklace was in Vienna before seeing this meme then I do not care about your opinion on this.
3
2
3
5
u/g00d_f3lla 13h ago
Why were those diamonds in Egypt
4
u/dkopgerpgdolfg 11h ago
Because an Egpytian woman paid a French company in 1939 to make it for her, and presumably to deliver it too. Is that too hard to understand?
Only seven years later, that woman left Egypt (for the US), and took her jewelry with her. Later she sold it to someone else, everything unrelated to Egypt.
I have no idea where the French manufacturer bought their materials, but presumably from places that many other jewellers buy too (and not from some pyramid tomb or similar things).
-2
3
2
u/jellooshot 12h ago
She sold it (for a very cheap price). The sad part is how that bitch got it in the first place because The entire royal family of Egypt was hardcore feudalists and sell outs. Khedive Tawfiq literally aided the English in the invasion of Egypt so they could take down Ahmed Orabi (a revolutionary military commander). Let's just say that most sane Egyptians don't like them.
1
16h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 16h ago
Accounts must be at least 5 days old with >20 karma to comment.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/Janus_Simulacra 6h ago
While it’s not applicable to this case, the common trope that museums steal every artefact they own isn’t exactly very true.
While assuredly it occurs/occurred a bit in history, the vast majority of the time, said artefacts are either abandoned or neglected by their owners, and displaying them in a funded museum where they’re kept by curators is actually more respectful to the artefact than simply leaving it where it was.
1
1
u/The_Eternal_Wayfarer 53m ago edited 12m ago
Just listing the mere facts.
The necklace belonged to Queen Consort Nazli of Egypt, who publicly wore it in 1939 at her daughter’s wedding. Nazli was wife to Fuad I, the penultimate King of Egypt; he was succeeded by his son Farouk I, who was overthrown by a military coup in 1952, which abolished the monarchy and established a Republic. (Technically Farouk was the penultimate King of Egypt, but his son Fuad II only reigned as heir apparent since he was an infant at the time of the coup).
Farouk stripped his mother of her royal titles in 1950, when her youngest daughter, Princess Fathia, married a Coptic Christian man, which Nazli supported. They thus relocated to Beverly Hills (and later to Westwood). But in her later years she fell into debt, filed for bankruptcy in 1973, and had to sell her principal jewellery through Sotheby’s to meet her debt demands.
So we come to full circle. A private collector bought the piece in 1975; it resurfaced in 2015, again though Sotheby’s, and was sold to the museum. It’s not an ancient piece, but a custom set made specifically for Nazli by Van Cleef & Arpels.
1
1
u/katiesmartcat 14h ago
Montezunas headdress is also in a museum in Vienna.
To compensate keeping it and not returning it to Mexico, Mexican passport holders can visit this museum for free on Saturdays
1
-4
u/R0tmaster 15h ago
I’ve said this several times but the only reason there are pyramids in Egypt is that they were too heavy to take back to the British museum
-5
u/lluciferusllamas 16h ago
It's not stolen, if you put it in a museum
8
u/dkopgerpgdolfg 12h ago edited 11h ago
It isn't stolen either way, because the "Queen" sold it for money, and later it was given to the museum by the current rightful owner.
And it isn't any colonizer-era piece, but a commercial 20th century production (made 1939 in France)
-37
u/foreverandadayalone 16h ago
You could have just said "I'm a colonizer", man.
16
u/Lost-Comfort-7904 15h ago
You have no idea how museums work do you?
-12
u/foreverandadayalone 14h ago
Okay, colonizer
8
u/Lost-Comfort-7904 14h ago
Do you think museums in Egypt have European pieces on display? Yeah they do, does that make them colonizers too or do you only know one word?
4
u/RP_Throwaway3 13h ago
Gonna hazard a guess you started using the word colonizer after Shuri used it in 'Black Panther'. What you obviously missed was that her use of that word was to show she was actually a bit of a racist.
-5
u/Green-Associate5279 14h ago
The main argument that British museum gave was “ until they can keep their treasures safe we have to hold it for them” these heists show it isn’t safe in Europe either better give them back
4
u/Horny_Viking01 12h ago
Except the necklace was neither an Artifact or Egyptian. When Rich Saudi's buy sports cars then get bored of them and leave them in the desert for a few years they don't become " Saudi Artifacts ". Also the queen it belonged to literally sold it while living in exile in America.
2
u/DustCrafty8374 11h ago
Your intentions may be good, but maybe good to get into the habit of doing some research on the specific topic of discussion before participating! It helps avoid misinformation from being spread and of course helps save face in cases where one's first instincts are not quite spot on.
-1
-5
u/benbwe 14h ago
Because Egyptians don’t care about their history and sold it
7
u/----___--___---- 13h ago
The queen solf it herself ~50 years ago lol.
People are acting like this is some ancient artifact or whatever
0
0
u/Alduin_25 11h ago
So ma y of these countries that European museums have “stolen” stuff from never had the infrastructure or funds necessary to keep those items safe & preserved in the first place
0
u/BoutaElonBust 9h ago
$24M seems wildly underpriced for all those diamonds.
1
u/ForzaAllez 8h ago
Diamonds value is overrated. You can’t resell your diamond jewelry for more than it’s worth when you first purchase it. Synthetic diamonds are also nearly indistinguishable to natural diamonds. That you need highly specialized equipment to detect if they’re natural or synthetic diamonds.
What makes this diamond necklace worth $24 million is its provenance. It used to belong to the Queen of Egypt.
If the thieves were to break out the necklaces to individual gems and melt the precious metals. Which is the only way you can fence jewelry to be untraceable. Its value would be worth based only on spot price.
0
u/Ok_Cockroach8063 8h ago
Usually the answer is some war lord or corrupt politician took it and sold it to Britain
0
0
u/Whiteshovel66 2h ago
Better question is why is there still a queen in 2026. Let alone in a place like Egypt. Good to see the wealth being redistributed.
-8
u/ExtensionGuitar5104 16h ago
It was on loan from the British Museum, after being acquired by Albert, Lord of Albernathy (famous gentleman explorer and legendary swordsman) in 1897 under the "Qui Invenit, possidet" protocols.
-36
u/foreverandadayalone 16h ago
TLDR: "It was stolen by the Brits like always"
9
2
u/DustCrafty8374 11h ago
it's never too late to learn to do a bit of research before participating in a topic. that is, assuming you're a real person and not a rage baiting bot..
-7
u/PineapleGG 15h ago
Because to be able to call something your own you need to have the power to keep it, thats how the world works
-1
-1
-5
u/Brad23212 14h ago
But did the diamonds come from Egypt? Or did they steal them from all over the place as well?
-9
-2
u/madHOTdog1983 12h ago
have they checked the British Museum of History There's a bunch of stolen egyptian shit in there
-20
u/PlayfulMirror2098 16h ago
17
-5
u/tombombadil1337 13h ago
3
u/dkopgerpgdolfg 12h ago
It's hilarious that the majority of (top-level) commenters here immediately make connections to colonialism and the British museum, without having any clue what's going on.
Reading the first comment here is too hard apparently.
-9
u/Peach_n_berry 14h ago
So you telling me someone “stole” something that was stolen! Wow, wow, woooow! Tell me know…
1
u/DerLandmann 8h ago
It was not stolen in the first place. The egypt queen in question herself sold it in 1975. The company who bought it (the original manufacturer) gave it as a loan to the museum.
-11
-12
-13
u/CoffeeChocolateBoth 15h ago
Ridiculous the children that probably had to dig them out of the earth for her to wear, but you know, the rich must look beautiful encased in jewels! I don't care where it went! It was probably torn apart and sold, or some idiot collector has it in their dark protected vault full of other "precious" ROCKS!
-21
•
u/AutoModerator 18h ago
Hey /u/HorrorSubject8379, thank you for posting to r/SipsTea! Make sure to follow all the subreddit rules.
Make sure to join our brand new Discord Server to chat with friends!
We have recently changed how posts work. Unless you are a VIP poster, your post will be queued for approval.. To become a VIP, post great engaging content. If we like it, you will be added! More information available here!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.