Re: Italian Royal Jewels - Crown & Private property Archived Message
Posted by Carlo  on September 16, 2012, 1:00 pm, in reply to "Re: Italian Royal Jewels - Crown & Private property"
They were bought by the King Umberto I and Queen Margherita using public funds, so it was a sort of usufruct to be used as long as they did representative functions for Italy. But these are only suppositions, because if the last King Umberto II has written "A chi di diritto", means that the question was not clear when he went into exile.
The question why they are not exhibited to the public is maybe linked to the same problem, the property of the jewels is still not fully solved.
When a couple of years ago Prince Vittorio Emanuele and his son Pr. Emanuele Filiberto presented a request of compensation (for 240 millions euro) for the property that were confiscated to them after the end of the monarchy, they were criticized a lot, I do not know if with right or not.
After all the Orléans in France kept their huge fortune until Count Henri of Paris, after we do not know what happened. King Michael of Romania received back some of his properties and he gets the same "pension" as the former heads of state of his country.
We do not talk about Greece because the way King Constantine II was treated was really against any law. I mean, 12 million euros for a property like Tatoi, the Villa Mon Repos and the Polyendry estate, they are really a joke. What is more that money was taken from the Natural Disasters Fund, that is why the Greek RF created with that money the Anna-Maria Foundation to help people who suffered damages during natural disasters.
--Previous Message--
: Fascinating. Why `a chi di diretto´? Do you
: mean it was unclear if these belonged to the
: Royal House or to the State of Italy?
:
: I think when it was a purchase by the Royal
: House or a gift to the Royal House, then it
: was their property. When the jewels were
: given 'in usufruct' by the State, then the
: State is the rightful owner.
:
: Why are the jewels not displayed? Is the
: State not sure about its ownership and they
: want to avoid a debate?
:
:
|
|
