(Photo) The Bitter Tale of Iran’s Royal Jewels Leaving the Country: Reza Khan Warned Parliament Not to Interfere — Any Crime by This Accursed Family Is Possible

Saturday, November 29, 2025

SAEDNEWS: After being forced to flee, Reza Khan carried with him a remarkable fortune. According to some historical records, part of the royal jewels was taken out of Iran by the British who accompanied him. Even if these claims are debated, there is no doubt about Reza Shah’s personal exploitation of the royal jewels.

(Photo) The Bitter Tale of Iran’s Royal Jewels Leaving the Country: Reza Khan Warned Parliament Not to Interfere — Any Crime by This Accursed Family Is Possible

According to the Saed News Social Affairs Service, citing Javan, between 3 and 25 Shahrivar 1320 (September 24 – October 16, 1941), from the day the Allies invaded Iran until Reza Shah’s resignation and departure, the country—and especially the capital—experienced days of intense anxiety. On one hand, news of Russian troops moving from Qazvin toward Tehran was alarming; on the other, London radio relentlessly criticized Reza Shah, accusing him of multiple offenses, including smuggling the royal jewels out of Iran. These reports eventually compelled the court to respond in parliament. Abbas Qoli Golshaian, acting Minister of Finance, appeared before the legislature two days before Reza Shah’s resignation and departure to assure representatives that the jewels were safely kept in the National Bank and had not left the country. Despite Golshaian’s detailed explanation, the parliamentarians remained unconvinced.

Parliament Intervenes on the Royal Jewels

On 25 Shahrivar, when Prime Minister Mohammad Ali Foroughi appeared before parliament in a frail state to read Reza Shah’s resignation, Ali Dashti—who had previously championed the Shah—suddenly reversed his position and protested vehemently. He demanded: “This matter must be fully investigated. Sending 100 or 200 people to view the jewels is not sufficient; rather, a parliamentary-trusted committee must verify them against the records. I request the Prime Minister clarify whether any action has been taken and whether parliament can be assured of the jewels’ security.”

Foroughi approved the proposal, assuring parliamentarians that the accounting of the jewels was entirely transparent. He emphasized: “The jewels are documented, and I am certain these records exist. They are secured in the National Bank. You may appoint a commission from inside or outside parliament to verify them. If accurate, excellent; if not, the matter will be clarified.”

Following repeated requests by parliamentarians to confirm that the royal jewels had not left the country and were securely stored in the Central Bank, on 15 Mehr 1320 (October 7, 1941), the third session of the Royal Jewels and Banknote Backing Commission convened. It was chaired by the head of the National Treasury, Taghavi, included twelve parliamentary representatives, and was attended by the government’s supervisory board over currency reserves.

Once formalities were completed, Qaneh Basiri, head of State Properties and Royal Estates, distributed a detailed report on the jewels’ status and storage procedures. An accompanying report by Orang recounted that in 1287 AH (1908 CE), a temporary government committee had cataloged the royal jewels at the building known as the Khabgah (current Ministry of Finance). Ten days later, the committee matched the jewels against official records under the supervision of prominent officials, including Ali Naqi Khan Sardar Asad and Hosseinqoli Khan Navab.

In 1300 AH (1921 CE), some of these jewels were fashioned into the Pahlavi crown, altering the original inventory. In 1308 AH (1929 CE), a French jeweler delegation from Boucheron evaluated the jewels under a commission led by then Minister of Interior Hossein Samiei. After assessment, full records were maintained, and the jewels were secured in sealed safes within the Khabgah treasury. In 1316 AH (1937 CE), a law mandated that historically significant jewels be transferred to the Golestan Palace Museum, while the remainder was held at the National Bank.

Historical Context of the Royal Jewels

The royal jewels, one of Iran’s most valuable historical collections, have well-documented histories from the Safavid era onward. Following the Constitutional Revolution, the constitution declared the jewels as property of the monarchy institution—not the personal property of the ruler. This distinction was reinforced after Mohammad Ali Shah sought refuge at the Russian Embassy and his jewels were reclaimed by constitutionalists. Thus, the jewels symbolized national power, and parliament exercised oversight by questioning officials, including the Prime Minister and Finance Minister.

Discussions over the royal jewels often mirrored political tensions. Domestic and foreign media sometimes published sensational claims of theft to pressure the court or sway public opinion. Parliament held exclusive authority to investigate, requiring responsible ministers—typically the Finance Minister—to respond within ten days. Even during Ahmad Shah’s reign, parliament intervened when reports emerged that he had pledged royal jewels abroad as collateral.

Reza Shah and the Controversy Over the Jewels

During Reza Shah’s reign, the royal jewels became a recurring news topic. After the Qajar dynasty fell and Reza Shah ascended in 1304 AH (1925 CE), the first priority was verifying the jewels’ security. Reza Shah personally inspected the treasury, ensuring the seals of the previous head, Bayan al-Saltaneh, remained intact.

In 1304 AH (1925 CE), new jewels were made for Reza Shah’s coronation, temporarily utilizing existing treasure pieces. After the ceremony, all items were returned to secure storage. Known for his military demeanor and aversion to Qajar court customs, Reza Shah rarely used the jewels publicly.

By 1306 AH (1927 CE), when the National Bank was being established, discussions resurfaced about leveraging the royal jewels to provide capital. Advocates argued selling some jewels could finance infrastructure projects, while opponents emphasized their historical value. Debates highlighted tensions between modernization, fiscal necessity, and cultural preservation.

Despite conflicting views, some parliamentarians noted that certain jewels might deteriorate over time, advocating for their conversion into cash. Others argued that the emergence of synthetic jewels would devalue the originals.

Allegations of Theft and Misuse

At Reza Shah’s departure, some parliamentarians believed the jewels remained in Iran, while others suspected theft. Though definitive evidence of theft is lacking, Reza Shah’s personal exploitation of the jewels is well documented. U.S. Minister Charles S. Hart reported that a high-ranking court official removed a large emerald and replaced it with green glass, later selling it in Paris for personal travel.

Previously, the jewels were managed by court officials, but Reza Shah centralized oversight, relocating them to better-secured facilities. Despite allegations, no conclusive proof of theft exists, though he repeatedly used the jewels for personal benefit without parliamentary approval.

Queen Mother Shams Pahlavi recounted that Reza Shah gifted precious jewels, including diamonds and gold, to his wife and family members. Some of these items never returned to the bank. While historical records are incomplete, it is undisputed that Reza Shah profited personally from the jewels, sometimes exploiting their sale to fund institutions like the National Bank under the guise of public benefit.

In Shams Pahlavi’s memoirs, she notes Reza Shah’s sarcastic reaction to theft allegations: “I have only three pounds and some change in the Swiss Bank, leftover from the Crown Prince’s education expenses... Perhaps during my reign, not a single pin in the royal jewels was damaged.”

Golshaian recorded the Shah’s disdain for parliamentary oversight: “The Shah said, ‘What does parliament have to do with it? They meddle too much, ignore them.’”

Given Reza Shah’s authoritarian nature, insatiable desire for wealth, and lack of accountability, the possibility of crimes or abuses by him or his family regarding royal property cannot be dismissed.