Written by the TreasureGuide for the exclusive use of the Treasure Beaches Report.
 |
| Joséphine de Beauharnais Source: TheCourtJeweller.com. |
Just in case, you are not that familiar with the history of Elizabeth Farnese, here is some background provided by Wikipedia. In 16 September 1714 she was married by proxy at Parma to Pillip V of Spain. The marriage was arranged by the ambassador of Parma, Cardinal Alberoni, with the concurrence of the Princese des Ursins, the Camarara mayor de Palacio of the King of Spain. She had stipulated to Philip that the marriage would not be consummated until she was decked with the jewels of her choosing...
Needless to say, treasure lore is not always accurate. That is especially true today with all of the reality TV and social media trying to sell views. I just found one web site that provides some good information on royal jewelry from centuries ago right up to today. For example, Josephine de Beauharnais, who married Napolean Bonaparte, had some nice jewels of her own. The web site begins that topic as follows.
Two hundred nineteen years ago today [from the time the article was written in 2015] Joséphine de Beauharnais, the Caribbean-born widow of a French aristocrat, married Napoléon Bonaparte, the French military commander who would one day become the country’s emperor. Joséphine wore a number of gorgeous pieces of jewelry in her lifetime; her descendants, who have married into numerous royal families, have continued her bejeweled legacy.
But how many of the pieces of jewelry said to have come from Joséphine’s collection were really worn by the empress? Today, let’s take a look at seven pieces often linked to Joséphine — and we’ll discuss whether or not their imperial provenance is genuine...
If you are interested in following that story, here is the link.
Joséphine’s Jewels: Myths and Legends (thecourtjeweller.com)
Perhaps you've heard Marie Antoinette's jewels mentioned on one treasure TV show. You can learn more about them on the same web site.
I also once discussed them in a previous post.
When it comes to historic royal jewels, TheCourtJeweller.com web site might be worth checking.
---
It isn't always obvious when beaches get eroded. It is obvious when there is a big cut, and it can be obvious when new rocks or layers of sand appear. But it isn't always that easy.
Towards the end of 2020 when some good shipwreck finds were made, one beach retreated along a stretch of beach maybe three hundred yards or more, but it wasn't very evident except at low tide when some rocks that hadn't been seen for quite a while appeared. Even seeing those rocks, you might not have appreciated the extent of the erosion.
There were three reasons the erosion was not more obvious. First of all the cut was not where it would be more easily noticed. The cut was all the way at the top of the beach, causing the dune face to fall in. If the cut was more in the middle of the beach, it would have been very obvious.
The second reason the erosion wasn't more obvious is the beach at that location is very long and broad with very few stable landmarks to measure the level of sand against. And the erosion was very even over most a large area.
The third reason is that the older layer of sand, which is a different color, was still covered by a few inches of the regular sand. Only if you dug down a few inches was the older sand clearly visible.
That was a case in which a large section of the beach retreated in a way that was not immediately obvious. And if you failed to notice it, you might have missed a lot of good targets.
---
I was watching the TV show Ancient Aliens. I think that was the show. And they were making a big deal out of ancient drawings that "looked like" flying saucers or space ships . It is easy to find likenesses to things, People are made for that. But you can notice likenesses without taking into account very significant differences. A circle with two or three dots and a curved line can look something like a face. : ) It really doesn't take much of a likeness for something to be recognized as a likeness. Slight similarities are sometimes taken as significant, while huge differences are ignored. Imagination can be wide ranging and encompassing.
This is important stuff when it comes to treasure hunting. It applies in many different ways. There is a need for discipline. While TV programs are eager to drum up excitement by appealing to the undisciplined imagination, for your own searches you need to be open to possibilities, but guided by evidence. It is easy to be strong in one of those and weak in the other. For example, when we try to figure out what a find is, we can be excited by our hopes, but then we have to exercise discipline and go by the best evidence only reaching a conclusion when the evidence becomes sufficient.
Creativity can be a good thing. It is an important part of the problem solving process, but objectivity, judgement and discipline are important too. There is a time for divergent thinking, and time for convergent thinking. You generate creative ideas, but then you reject many of those as you narrow things down to a single best solution.
I hate how the moderator on the History channel incessantly asks "Could it be." "Could it be King George's toe nail." By some gymnastic stretch of the imagination, it could possibly be whatever wild idea they pose, but at the same time there are endless other possibilities that are much more likely.
It is easy to generalize. Too easy. We are built to generalize. It is necessary for learning. But it is also necessary to pay attention to differences. |
| Gray Hairstreak Butterfly Feeding On Tropical Milkweed. |
 |
| Source: nhc.noaa.gov |