Beth, I broadly support just about all you write here.
Roberts was extremely circumspect in the QD and handled the transfer of jewels from one to another with tremendous tact, I thought.
I think I have suggested before that there could easily be some "disputes" within the family, even today - and as so often occurs in many families over property - and Roberts has been tactful for more than one reason, is my suggestion.
--Previous Message-- : 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 9, 2014, 1:33 am, in reply to "