Speaking of jewelry collection, there is an interesting fact: the largest jewelry collectors in history are almost all men, and in various large-scale jewelry auctions, the big buyers who compete for important and expensive collections are all men. I have observed it myself, and the typical image is a thin little old man over half a year old, mostly Jewish, and a few tall people are Arabs.

There is also a more obvious feature: the most outstanding jewelry masters are almost all men. From david webb to Stephen Webster, from Jean Schlumberger to JAR, from technology to style, from design to management, men shine in every corner of the jewelry industry. So jewelry should be a world dominated by men. For example, a bracelet composed of five ancient Roman coins, although not signed, is carefully designed and made, big enough for men to wear.

In fact, jewelry has always been the most important ornament for men. Written records and works of art in ancient Egypt, China, Greece and Rome clearly indicate that the core audience of jewelry is kings, nobles, generals and sacrifices, and then it is their turn to be wives. Until16th century, Henry VIII wore more jewels than any other woman of his generation.

If you pay attention to the history of jewelry for a long time, especially visiting various jewelry exhibitions, you will understand? Men used to dominate jewelry? The argument. However, in recent centuries, jewelry has been increasingly dominated by women, both in design and in the market. Fortunately, no matter how it changes, the motivation and habit of men to use jewelry, and even the strong style of men's jewelry in design and momentum can not be shaken.

But in the past twenty years, apart from professionals, I have hardly met any domestic men who like jewelry and buy jewelry. This shows that the domestic understanding of jewelry has been hovering at the commodity and market levels.