At the Los Angeles premiere of Wuthering Heights, Margot Robbie wore a Cartier necklace with a history spanning four centuries of empire, extraction, and cultural complexity. This Margot Robbie Cartier necklace, previously owned by Elizabeth Taylor and valued around US $8 million, carries stories rooted in colonial India as well as modern legal battles, revealing much more than its glittering surface suggests.
The Necklace’s Royal Origins in Mughal India
The striking pendant Margot Robbie wore was not simply a celebrity heirloom; its origins trace back to Nur Jahan, the powerful wife of Mughal emperor Jahangir in the early 1600s. The diamond is heart-shaped and table-cut—a style prioritizing a flat surface over brilliance—and bears an inscription in Persian nasta‘liq script. This engraving records three key pieces of information: Nur Jahan Begum Padshah’s name, the number 23 marking Jahangir’s 23rd year of rule, and the Hijri year 1037, corresponding to 1627–1628.
In the Mughal empire, such gems were not mere ornaments but valuable documents, encoding ownership, alliances, and historical memory into their very surfaces. After Jahangir’s death, the jewel passed to his son Shah Jahan, who gave it to Mumtaz Mahal, the woman whose demise inspired the Taj Mahal. Western historians often label this gem as the “Taj Mahal diamond,” a name more reflective of branding than its actual provenance. Following this period, the diamond apparently remained within the Mughal treasury, transferring between successive emperors rather than entering private collections.
Journey from India to European Royal Collections
How this Mughal treasure traveled from India’s imperial courts to the Hollywood red carpet is filled with gaps, but historians largely attribute its removal to Nadir Shah’s 1739 sack of Delhi. During this raid, Persian forces looted the Mughal treasury, scattering priceless items across Europe and Russia through private sales. Centuries later, Cartier acquired the diamond, though the specifics of this transfer remain unclear.
A 1971 New York Times report suggests Cartier obtained the necklace from Mrs. Robert H. Kenmore’s collection; her husband had significant influence in the company at the time. This obscurity fuels the tendency for narratives to simplify the necklace’s history, suggesting it
“found its way to Elizabeth and Richard”
Burton as if by chance, overlooking the deeper colonial past entwined with the gem’s journey.
By the 20th century, the diamond was part of Cartier’s holdings, initially displayed on a traditional silk cord typical of South Asian jewelry. In 1971, Cartier designer Alfred Durante reimagined the necklace by replacing this cord with a gold chain adorned with cabochon rubies and old mine-cut diamonds, transforming it into a piece reflecting high European luxury while maintaining a flow reminiscent of fabric.
The necklace was given to Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton in 1972 in a gesture orchestrated by Cartier’s president Michael Thomas during a layover at Kennedy Airport. Burton later gifted it to Taylor on her 40th birthday in Budapest while filming Bluebeard. Under Taylor’s ownership, the diamond became symbolic of their tumultuous relationship, adding a Hollywood mythos layer onto an already rich historical narrative.
Legal Disputes Surrounding the “Eternal Love” Jewel
Following Elizabeth Taylor’s death, her extensive jewelry collection went up for auction at Christie’s in 2011. The Taj Mahal diamond was initially estimated at $300,000 to $500,000 but sold for a record-breaking $8.8 million, underscoring its allure linked to a story of Mughal romance, Hollywood glamour, and eternal love.
The buyer soon raised doubts about the diamond’s purported Mughal origins and sought to undo the purchase. Christie’s agreed to cancel the sale, demanding the Elizabeth Taylor Trust return over $7 million. The trust refused, leading to a protracted and complicated legal battle. Eventually, the dispute was resolved, but the episode highlighted the necklace’s value being deeply tied not only to its physical qualities but also to the stories and trust woven around it.
Cartier’s Role in Shaping Cultural Narratives and Access
Cartier’s handling of South Asian jewels, including the Taj Mahal diamond worn by Margot Robbie, illustrates broader issues of cultural appropriation and historical erasure. The brand controls which stories are told and which bodies get to wear these pieces, often favoring white celebrities while sidelining Indian and South Asian figures. For instance, the famed Patiala necklace, crafted by Cartier in 1928 for Maharaja Bhupinder Singh of Patiala, disappeared after 1948, only to resurface partially reconstructed at Cartier. In 2022, American influencer Emma Chamberlain wore a Cartier choker believed to be part of the Patiala set at the Met Gala.
In contrast, when Punjabi singer Diljit Dosanjh’s team reportedly requested the original Patiala necklace for his Met Gala appearance, Cartier allegedly declined, citing “museum conditions.” As a result, Dosanjh wore inspired jewelry rather than the actual heirloom, fueling frustration within South Asian and diasporic communities over who has access to these cultural treasures.
Margot Robbie, an Australian actress, wearing one of the few surviving Mughal jewels highlights recurring tensions: Cartier mediates the public visibility of South Asian history, often through white bodies. Consequently, much of the subcontinent’s heritage jewelry is primarily encountered by South Asian audiences when loaned to outsiders.
The Intersection of Fashion, History, and Representation in Wuthering Heights
This critique is not directed at Margot Robbie personally. As a fellow Gold Coast native, her choices for the Wuthering Heights press tour have been consistently thoughtful and aligned with the film’s themes. Robbie has explained that she selected the Taj Mahal diamond for its layered “romantic history” fitting the story of obsessive love depicted in the film.
However, media coverage largely centers the necklace’s chapter involving Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton, glossing over its Mughal past. Centuries of ownership become reduced to vague phrases like “eventually entered Taylor’s collection” or “found its way” to Hollywood, erasing significant earlier histories. Some coverage has even misidentified the script on the diamond, wrongly calling it Parsee instead of Persian, further muddying the jewel’s story, as noted by digital publication The Juggernaut.
@bethejuggernaut *Why* is Margot Robbie wearing a 1600s pendant Jahangir gave his wife Nur Jahan — and why are they calling it Elizabeth Taylor’s Taj Mahal necklace? @snigdhasur explains Dearest readers, Cartier has once again loaned out Indian royal jewelry — that mysteriously “found its way” to Elizabeth Taylor — while refusing requests to those of Indian heritage (see: Diljit Dosanjh). Make it make sense. To read more about Cartier claiming Indian designs as its own, click the link below, and subscribe to The Juggernaut for all the South Asian news you need to know. https://www.thejuggernaut.com/how-cartier-built-an-empire-by-claiming-indian-and-islamic-art-as-its-own #cartier #tajmahal #indian #colonialism ♬ original sound – The Juggernaut
— @bethejuggernaut, Social Media Post
South Asian writers and creators are working to fill these gaps, revealing Nur Jahan’s power, unpacking the inscription, and exposing how jewelry from the region often only becomes visible when worn by white women at Western events. The stories of the objects’ original owners are frequently sidelined even as the theme of “eternal love” is emphasized.
Further controversy surrounds the casting choices in Wuthering Heights itself. Emerald Fennell has faced criticism for casting Jacob Elordi as Heathcliff, a character traditionally seen as a racialized outsider, representing a missed opportunity to cast a person of color in a major Gothic role. This represents another layer of the complex interplay of race, representation, and history surrounding the film and the necklace.
The juxtaposition is stark: Wuthering Heights examines obsession, class, race, and the lasting shadow of past injustices, while the Taj Mahal diamond carries literal marks of empire, ownership, legal battles, and cultural erasure. The inscription remains a tangible reminder of the diamond’s origins amid the shifting stories told about it.
There is no objection to appreciating the fashion itself—Margot Robbie’s bold choice for the premiere is commendable. The concern arises when public understanding stops at the last chapter of the necklace’s story, the Elizabeth Taylor era, rather than acknowledging the four centuries etched into its surface. Especially for those raised amidst the legacies of empire, the diamond demands that we read beyond Hollywood’s final act.
