CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · History & Society

Buccellati

Italian jewellery and watch company

Layered newspapers, civic records and oral-history reels arranged as chronological evidence
History and societyInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionMay 3, 2026
Entity authoritySource title only
Source-derived summary

Buccellati Holding Italia S.p.A. is an Italian jewellery and watch company. It was formed in 2011 through the merger of two previous luxury brands, Mario Buccellati and Gianmaria Buccellati, the names of two master goldsmiths who were father and son. The company is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Swiss holding company Richemont.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Buccellati” as italian jewellery and watch company. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewMost valuable as an event-and-institution map that identifies actors, dates and record creators for deeper historical inquiry. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2011—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Buccellati, Italian and jewellery can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the history & society register because the source frames it as italian jewellery and watch company. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

Chronology, provenance and viewpoint should be read together before a broad social or political interpretation is accepted. The source revision retrieved here is dated May 3, 2026. The first chronological checks are 2011.

Critical limits

Later summaries often reconcile disputed chronology or motive more neatly than the contemporary record permits. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.

Best used for
  • Event chronology
  • Institutional context
  • Locating named record creators
Verify next

Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Buccellati”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Buccellati primary sources, Buccellati archive and Buccellati research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Buccellati”?
  2. Who created the surviving record, and for what administrative purpose?
  3. Which voices are present, absent or mediated by the institution?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Buccellati” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.