I agree with Nellie that the word, copyright, refers to the photograph (not ownership of the tiara) and indicates that others cannot use the photograph without permission. Field's sweeping statement is only her interpretation, and has a lot of holes in it. It ignores the fact that Queen Mary did not hand over all of QA's major jewels to QEQM. For example, Queen Mary kept the brooch (Roberts p 88) and earrings (Roberts p 92) from the pearl wedding suite, as well as the Kokoshnik tiara. (Roberts p 102) She also kept Queen Alexandra's collet necklace. (See Roberts p 94) We know that QA's wedding gift tiara - a major jewel - did not stay with the main royal line. I find it significant that Roberts talks about the personal collection of The Queen (p 12-13). When he is indicating the time HM acquired or acquired use of specific jewels, he uses terms to differentiate an inheritance from when she acquired access because she is the sovereign. For example, on p 84 he says she 'inherited' Queen Alexandra's wedding necklace in 2002. On page 94 he says that Queen Alexandra's collet necklace was 'bequeathed' to The Queen in 1953. Because Queen Alexandra indicated that her Dagmar necklace should be a crown heirloom, he describes on p 98 it 'passing in succession...' from one queen to the other and to QEII in 1952. In relation to the Lovers Knot tiara he states on p 182 that it 'was inherited by The Queen...' and 'worn by Diana,... following her marriage in 1981' which seems to indicate that Diana is not considered to have owned the tiara personally. As the Papyrus tiara, formerly worn by Princess Margaret, is now back in The Queen's possession, it is probable that some informal arrangements have been made within the Royal family about ownership of specific jewels. I think it is significant that when Queen Mary annotated her jewellery inventory in relation to the Delhi Durbar tiara, she stated that it was given to QEQM to wear in South Africa and then QM said it was 'retained' by QEQM. To me, Roberts' phraseology highlights which items are considered entirely private property which the individual is at liberty to dispose of freely. The current arrangement, which it is said HM has with the government, provides an avenue for assets to pass from monarch to monarch (and presumably assets of their widowed spouses to the monarch) without being diminished by inheritance taxes. None of the indications the public has been given suggests that items, such as the Lovers Knot tiara, are owned by the Royal Collection. To me it would seem illogical for The Queen to hand over valuable private property.
on October 8, 2014, 10:18 pm, in reply to "