The Future of the British Monarchy 1: 2018 - 2022


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
So just to add another twist to this whole mess...I won't link the articles here but apparently a picture of Harry and Meghan has been removed from a prominent place in the Queen's receiving room. Now, before anyone goes on the warpath and accuses me of not knowing how things work, we all know that the Queen often rotates photographs of her family so I certainly wouldn't read much into the fact that a photograph has been moved. However, I will say that the Queen has been at this game for a very, very long time and I'm 100% positive that with everything happening and all of the media coverage she absolutely knew that the absence of that photograph would be remarked upon, particularly when the other photographs on that table remained the same.

I would caution that we shouldn't read much, if anything, into this but fair is fair and if we can all comment on the fact that she's been positioning Andrew beside her in the car on the way to church as show of support, I think it's fair to mention that this seems like a very quiet but still knowledgeable way to make a statement should she choose to do so.

I'm bracing myself for the attack and onslaught that I know is coming because well, let's face it, we all know it's coming. But I do think it's a rather interesting sidenote in the current climate of things and given that the Queen's ability to make subtle statements and understand the power of small gestures should not be underestimated.

I think it's highly likely that the next few months should prove to be a very interesting, and possibly highly frustrating, time for us royal watchers.

I noticed that same thing and found it interesting. As to what it means? Could mean nothing or could mean she is distancing herself from the fallout. We will never know. Interesting observation nonetheless.
 
So just to add another twist to this whole mess...I won't link the articles here but apparently a picture of Harry and Meghan has been removed from a prominent place in the Queen's receiving room. Now, before anyone goes on the warpath and accuses me of not knowing how things work, we all know that the Queen often rotates photographs of her family so I certainly wouldn't read much into the fact that a photograph has been moved. However, I will say that the Queen has been at this game for a very, very long time and I'm 100% positive that with everything happening and all of the media coverage she absolutely knew that the absence of that photograph would be remarked upon, particularly when the other photographs on that table remained the same.

I would caution that we shouldn't read much, if anything, into this but fair is fair and if we can all comment on the fact that she's been positioning Andrew beside her in the car on the way to church as show of support, I think it's fair to mention that this seems like a very quiet but still knowledgeable way to make a statement should she choose to do so.

I'm bracing myself for the attack and onslaught that I know is coming because well, let's face it, we all know it's coming. But I do think it's a rather interesting sidenote in the current climate of things and given that the Queen's ability to make subtle statements and understand the power of small gestures should not be underestimated.

I think it's highly likely that the next few months should prove to be a very interesting, and possibly highly frustrating, time for us royal watchers.

I had seen that too, but it looked to me as though the photograph had simply been moved to the other side of the table. Is that correct? Either way, I'm not sure there's much significance. Interesting, but she does like to change her photos around.
 
I had seen that too, but it looked to me as though the photograph had simply been moved to the other side of the table. Is that correct? Either way, I'm not sure there's much significance. Interesting, but she does like to change her photos around.

Based on the photographs in the articles it does appear that it was actually removed rather than just rearranged. The other photos remained in the same places they had been before. Again, it could mean absolutely nothing other than she had the urge to rearrange. I won't lie, I do it all the time in my own house and it drives my husband insane. However, it could be a subtle sign that she's distancing herself, that she doesn't really approve of all that's going on, or that there are significant changes afoot. Could mean any or all of those things or could mean nothing. I just thought it was interesting timing given that the Queen is anything but naive and I am 100% sure she knew that it would be noticed and commented upon and left open for interpretation.
 
Say it is a sign of disapproval, _Heather_. It makes me think less of the Queen. Harry isn’t throwing a tantrum because he’s not getting his way. His wife has been attacked. Her family has been weaponized to hurt her. He’s fighting back against a 3 year smear campaign. And through all of this, they’ve done everything asked of them. Successful tours. Charities inside the UK receiving attention and funds from their events and endeavors. From the outside, removing their picture seems petty and reinforces the belief the family hasn’t been supportive of the Sussexes. It’s just not a good look, so I hope the picture was dusted and turned to the side by accident.
 
Say it is a sign of disapproval, _Heather_. It makes me think less of the Queen. Harry isn’t throwing a tantrum because he’s not getting his way. His wife has been attacked. Her family has been weaponized to hurt her. He’s fighting back against a 3 year smear campaign. And through all of this, they’ve done everything asked of them. Successful tours. Charities inside the UK receiving attention and funds from their events and endeavors. From the outside, removing their picture seems petty and reinforces the belief the family hasn’t been supportive of the Sussexes. It’s just not a good look, so I hope the picture was dusted and turned to the side by accident.

I see what you're saying and again, absolutely none of us have any way to know what the actual motivation was or if there even was a motivation. Maybe it was knocked off and the glass broken. Maybe she's got a picture of them with Archie that she's planning to frame and set in its place. Or maybe she is taking a dig at them through a relatively subtle means. There's no way for us to know but I do think it's interesting timing and certainly worth mentioning since there are posters who consistently make a lot of noise about whether or not the Sussexes are being supported in their crusades by the rest of the BRF and why the Queen is shown publicly supporting Andrew but isn't making grand public gestures of support for Meghan and Harry.
 
I see what you're saying and again, absolutely none of us have any way to know what the actual motivation was or if there even was a motivation. Maybe it was knocked off and the glass broken. Maybe she's got a picture of them with Archie that she's planning to frame and set in its place. Or maybe she is taking a dig at them through a relatively subtle means. There's no way for us to know but I do think it's interesting timing and certainly worth mentioning since there are posters who consistently make a lot of noise about whether or not the Sussexes are being supported in their crusades by the rest of the BRF and why the Queen is shown publicly supporting Andrew but isn't making grand public gestures of support for Meghan and Harry.

Not sure about the photograph, we are only seeing one part of the room. There Could be as somebody said be a more updated one with Archie that didn't fit on the table. The part about public gestures could have been addressed if they had gone to Balmoral over the summer. They didn't therefore no public gesture.
 
So just to add another twist to this whole mess...I won't link the articles here but apparently a picture of Harry and Meghan has been removed from a prominent place in the Queen's receiving room. Now, before anyone goes on the warpath and accuses me of not knowing how things work, we all know that the Queen often rotates photographs of her family so I certainly wouldn't read much into the fact that a photograph has been moved. However, I will say that the Queen has been at this game for a very, very long time and I'm 100% positive that with everything happening and all of the media coverage she absolutely knew that the absence of that photograph would be remarked upon, particularly when the other photographs on that table remained the same.

I would caution that we shouldn't read much, if anything, into this but fair is fair and if we can all comment on the fact that she's been positioning Andrew beside her in the car on the way to church as show of support, I think it's fair to mention that this seems like a very quiet but still knowledgeable way to make a statement should she choose to do so.

I'm bracing myself for the attack and onslaught that I know is coming because well, let's face it, we all know it's coming. But I do think it's a rather interesting sidenote in the current climate of things and given that the Queen's ability to make subtle statements and understand the power of small gestures should not be underestimated.

I think it's highly likely that the next few months should prove to be a very interesting, and possibly highly frustrating, time for us royal watchers.

I totally agree with your statement and your point about the Queen's media savvy in knowing the photograph would be commented on.
 
Well if she is publicly supporting her son who has links to a pedophile and distancing herself from her granddaughter in law of mixed race who feels attacked. Well that is an interesting thing and says quite a bit. What a message.... allegedly.
 
Not sure about the photograph, we are only seeing one part of the room. There Could be as somebody said be a more updated one with Archie that didn't fit on the table. The part about public gestures could have been addressed if they had gone to Balmoral over the summer. They didn't therefore no public gesture.

Agreed. I really think it was at the very least a PR mistake not to be seen at Balmoral. But it's hard for me to wrap my head around the outcry about "no public support from the Queen" when they didn't allow themselves to be publicly supported in the traditional way in which the Queen shows that support. But, in the grand scheme of things, we shall see over the next few months whether or not something as simple as the placement of a photograph acts as a teaser about where this family and organization are headed or whether it was simply nothing more than a rearrangement of knick knacks.
 
Harry wasn’t going to Balmoral before he married Meghan. And they live next door to the Queen at Windsor, why would they need to rush up there when they probably see her more than the rest of the family since their move to Frogmore?
 
Harry wasn’t going to Balmoral before he married Meghan. And they live next door to the Queen at Windsor, why would they need to rush up there when they probably see her more than the rest of the family since their move to Frogmore?


It was in the context of a show of public support,There were posts inferring lack of public support from the Queen, yet she had shown support for her son. All I was commenting on was that the queen is in Balmoral over the summer months, if they had gone up to visit there would have been an opportunity for the public show of support that people on here are commenting on. It was nothing to do with the number of times they visit Windsor or see her privately.

For all we know they maybe did not want the public display of driving to church etc, they maybe saw that as interfering in to their private time. who knows...
 
Harry wasn’t going to Balmoral before he married Meghan. And they live next door to the Queen at Windsor, why would they need to rush up there when they probably see her more than the rest of the family since their move to Frogmore?

Because if whatt they’re wanting is a public show of support from HM then they need to position themselves to receive that show in the place in which it typically occurs which just happens to be Balmoral. Now, if they don’t care about HM’s support or lack thereof or don’t care or won’t get a public show of support from her then you’re correct and there’s no need to go there. But when the person you’re hoping to garner support from is the Queen then you need to go to her rather than expecting her to come to you.
 
The Queen could also show support by being seen with them at Windsor...you know where they all live/spend a lot of time at...

Anyway, I never really trusted the report of them turning down an invite. Harry rarely has gone up to Balmoral in recent years, and I expect the Queen fully knew they were not planning a trip long before August.
 
Last edited:
Because if whatt they’re wanting is a public show of support from HM then they need to position themselves to receive that show in the place in which it typically occurs which just happens to be Balmoral. Now, if they don’t care about HM’s support or lack thereof or don’t care or won’t get a public show of support from her then you’re correct and there’s no need to go there. But when the person you’re hoping to garner support from is the Queen then you need to go to her rather than expecting her to come to you.

To be honest it is not Harry and Meghan that are on record asking for public show of support from his grandmother it is the posters on here, maybe they do not feel the need.
 
Harry wasn’t going to Balmoral before he married Meghan. And they live next door to the Queen at Windsor, why would they need to rush up there when they probably see her more than the rest of the family since their move to Frogmore?

Prince Charles lives at Clarence House which is a mere few blocks from Buckingham Palace. The Cambridges live at Kensington which is a quick ride to Buckingham. Prince Andrew lives in the Windsor park equally as close as Meghan and Harry. The Queen has a heavy schedule even for her age. She is the Queen after all. It's not about the distance between her official residences where they work and live. Balmoral is the a traditional gathering place for the family away from pressures of the court and busy schedules. These years are precious to spend with the Queen and Prince Phillip, so yes, putting the extra effort is very important.
 
Y'know... all this positioning on just how the BRF should show support for Harry and Meghan publicly reminds me of a very confusing game called chess. Moving the queen here and the bishop there and the knight to protect the rook. I don't play chess. Its basically machinations of people within an institution (the monarchy) to appease and pacify the masses and those that would spread the word to said masses.

Two Sussex threads and now this one have totally gone off kilter as the latest installation of the "Woes of Windsor" epic saga flashes across our screens. All the opinions and ideas are valid ones as we all see things differently. What we *don't* know for fact is how the monarchy is viewing this. At all. The fact that the movement or replacement of a photograph on a table has drummed up so many responses as to the "whys", its mind boggling. Its the Queen sending a foreboding message and the end of monarchy, as we know it, lies ahead! The Queen smiled at her son (who she may have told to put on his "game face" as they're in public stating "we'll discuss this more later.") and she's favoring one huge mistake over others.

How the monarchy itself (the Firm) chooses to handle problems is their own internal affairs and no matter how long and how loud the public bleats, they'll keep things internal and handle things as they see fit. As far as how the Queen (or any other member of the BRF) chooses to react, support or withdraw support on the current issues is also not for public consumption as its a private family matter.

This may really all be a tempest in a teapot that been left to boil for too long. Feelings and emotions were shared and really, there's nothing wrong with that in my book other than perhaps a oversight into the fact that it would be like adding gasoline to a fire and backfire on them. I do think if things were really, really bad and messed up and chaotic, engagements would have been cancelled (rare to call into the "Firm" sick but it's happened before) and the Sussex family immediately going into seclusion without a word and turning into "ghosts" until the holidays.

Its business as usual in the everyday life of the "Firm". The Court Circular continues to record the activities of the British Royal Family and its "Firm" (although updating is a bit iffy at times). Both Harry and Meghan are still doing their work and the dogs still need to be fed and watered and walked on their private time.

And we thought the silly season was over and settled down. Little did we imagine. :D
 
Last edited:
I believe, they think , they have that clout and that's one of the problems they are having . Their self image doesn't fit with their reality . Maybe a result of the Diana's boys narrative , that saw them as one and the same and now William is clearly on a different path (to use that word) than Harry and doesn't really know how to be a supportive act to William after being his media twin for so long .

The fact that the different positions the two “boys” held weren’t really made clear until their 30s did them both a disservice. I get that it must be hard when there are only two children and they’re so close in age and both boys but their distinct roles and eventual positions in the BRF should have been emphasized to the public AND William and Harry from the time they were children, and certainly should have been set in stone by the time they were teenagers. I’m sure this issue was likely not at the top of the royal priority list during The War of the Wales era and then with Diana’s death, but I think it’s much easier to adapt to a certain set of circumstances as a child than it is to be treated one way up until your 30s and then have the blanket pulled out from under you over the course of a few years. And, to me, it doesn’t really matter that William and Harry are the grandchildren of the monarch and not her children. The fact remains that one of them is going to be King and one is not, and this was known from the time they were born.

I think the royal house has stepped up the behind the scenes preparations for the end of The Queen’s reign and that these preparations naturally centre around Charles and William. It’s possible Harry realized he’s never going to be a part of the planning and discussions at the highest level the way his brother will be and it’s been mentally difficult for him, as I think it would be for most people.

I think Harry is certainly under stress from the big changes in his personal life over the past couple of years, as well as the issues with the media. But all of this is happening with pretty big professional changes looming for him, as well. This is all conjecture on my part but to me it would provide at least a partial explanation for Harry and Meghan striking out on their own as their own unit more than would be expected and also the coolness between the two brothers, or at least Harry’s willingness to discuss their relationship publicly.
 
Y'know... all this positioning on just how the BRF should show support for Harry and Meghan publicly reminds me of a very confusing game called chess. Moving the queen here and the bishop there and the knight to protect the rook. I don't play chess. Its basically machinations of people within an institution (the monarchy) to appease and pacify the masses and those that would spread the word to said masses.

Two Sussex threads and now this one have totally gone off kilter as the latest installation of the "Woes of Windsor" epic saga flashes across our screens. All the opinions and ideas are valid ones as we all see things differently. What we *don't* know for fact is how the monarchy is viewing this. At all. The fact that the movement or replacement of a photograph on a table has drummed up so many responses as to the "whys", its mind boggling. Its the Queen sending a foreboding message and the end of monarchy, as we know it, lies ahead! The Queen smiled at her son (who she may have told to put on his "game face" as they're in public stating "we'll discuss this more later.") and she's favoring one huge mistake over others.

How the monarchy itself (the Firm) chooses to handle problems is their own internal affairs and no matter how long and how loud the public bleats, they'll keep things internal and handle things as they see fit. As far as how the Queen (or any other member of the BRF) chooses to react, support or withdraw support on the current issues is also not for public consumption as its a private family matter.

This may really all be a tempest in a teapot that been left to boil for too long. Feelings and emotions were shared and really, there's nothing wrong with that in my book other than perhaps a oversight into the fact that it would be like adding gasoline to a fire and backfire on them. I do think if things were really, really bad and messed up and chaotic, engagements would have been cancelled (rare to call into the "Firm" sick but it's happened before) and the Sussex family immediately going into seclusion without a word and turning into "ghosts" until the holidays.

Its business as usual in the everyday life of the "Firm". The Court Circular continues to record the activities of the British Royal Family and its "Firm" (although updating is a bit iffy at times). Both Harry and Meghan are still doing their work and the dogs still need to be fed and watered and walked on their private time.

And we thought the silly season was over and settled down. Little did we imagine. :D

:lol: Absolutely calling it as is Osipi Love it! Thanks for the reminder that we are all getting a little nutty with all this drama. However, I am still enjoying it and learning as well. :flowers:
 
I noticed that same thing and found it interesting. As to what it means? Could mean nothing or could mean she is distancing herself from the fallout. We will never know. Interesting observation nonetheless.

I thought it had long been established the Queen has many photos in that room, including those from foreign royals, and they move about regularly. Everything i have read says the Queen is supporting both brothers equally, if there is no pic of H&M is there a pic of every other of her grandchildren? If not does it mean she dislikes them to?

I do think it was a bad move for H&M not to go to Balmoral, as many have said it is the place that the royals go for family time and family issues could have been sorted out there. Communication works both ways, the Queen can't ask them if they are okay and talk about their issues if they don't see her and there is no way she is gong to break precedence now and go on TV to express her feelings.

IMO this has nothing to do with the Queen, she has supported H&M as a couple at pretty much every opportunity possible. She invited Meghan to Sandringham before they were married, a first. She invited Meghan on an away day travelling on the royal train within months of her marriage, again a first. She convinced her own assistant private secretary to stay on despite it being public knowledge she had resigned and asked her to work with the Sussex's, a first and a sign HM was anxious to ensure they were fully supported. Rightly or wrongly the Queen has always been a hands off grandmother in some ways, she seems to prefer to allow them to get on and leave their parents to intervene if necessary.

The Queen didn't intervene when Beatrice and Eugenie were being ridiculed in the press, even when Andrew came out and said enough. Yes she is head of the family but she is also the Head of State and it has to be accepted that in light of that she keeps some distance between her and the day to day politics of her family. She clearly supports them all and cares for all of them and you know if H&M had gone to Balmoral the papers would have been full of pictures of Meghan sitting next to her in the car to church, just as they were Kate & William and plenty of other royals, including even Andrew when he is facing his own PR problems.
 
The Queen could also show support by being seen with them at Windsor...you know where they all live/spend a lot of time at...

Anyway, I never really trusted the report of them turning down an invite. Harry rarely has gone up to Balmoral in recent years, and I expect the Queen fully knew they were not planning a trip long before August.
Sorry...? The Monarch is to be supported by his/ her family and the aristocracy (they even swear it at the coronation!) as a mark of loyalty, respect and "compensation" for the heavy burden of her office - and not a young celebrity couple!
Who does not see the difference between these two, has no idea of the concept of monarchy at all!
 
Sorry...? The Monarch is to be supported by his/ her family and the aristocracy (they even swear it at the coronation!) as a mark of loyalty, respect and "compensation" for the heavy burden of her office - and not a young celebrity couple!
Who does not see the difference between these two, has no idea of the concept of monarchy at all!

Sorry...did you not read the rest of the earlier posts I was responding to? Perhaps you should before making such a condescending response to me. Thanks.

And that young celebrity couple is her family whom she loves.
 
I do think these are trying times for the image of the monarchy. 2020 will be interesting because I feel they will focus more than ever on Charles and his line.
 
I don't believe the Queen is "losing her grip" on the monarchy or that anything really is that much different than how the BRF always has been. Its just that the "mystique" is gone and the royal family is being seen more and more for who they really are as human beings.

With everyone and their poodle carrying a smart phone with a camera, the popularity of social media and a media that has a nose like a hunting dog to "sniff" out any kind of story, the public is being inundated more than ever with information we want to know about the royal family (and things also that we shouldn't know).

If the monarchy can survive all of the crises such as Queen consort losing their head, a King that abdicated over the love of a woman and a public that relentlessly demanded the Queen show herself at a time of great loss in the family, it'll survive Andrew's foibles and bad decisions. ?
 
The present model of having a royal family support the monarch may be on the way out. It is after all a relatively recent phenomena. It might be to the good if relatives of the monarch can lead the lives they want & not be bound by a duty they didn't ask for. In the end they might be happier & more fulfilled.

The crown as an institution will endure because the alternative is a republic & there is no real appetite for that. Not in this realm at least, I can't speculate about the others.
 
All the fussing here over Harry and Meghan is just insane to me. It’s exactly the kind of in-house squabbling that every generation of this family has gone through and weathered. In the scheme of things it is truly NOTHING.

But Andrew is potentially a much bigger blow. Forget about whether or not he had sex with the woman who accuses him of that. To go on a TV interview and be the poster child for out-of-touch, don’t-even-notice-the-little-people-because-they’re-probably-just-staff stereotypes of royals at their least necessary is incredibly damaging. A major aspect of the “brand” of modern royalty is that they use their prominence to shine light on the needs of people less fortunate than them. Their work is largely charity and taking the role of personifying their nation’s care for the Everyman. His own daughters are patrons of organizations that combat sex trafficking/slavery, and yet he can’t be bothered to express even a basic blanket statement of compassion or concern for the girls caught in Epstein’s web? His selfish, blasé attitude feeds the concern many have that the royals don’t really care and that it’s really all about living that privileged, extravagant life. That interview was very much a “let them eat cake” kind of moment.
 
The present model of having a royal family support the monarch may be on the way out. It is after all a relatively recent phenomena. It might be to the good if relatives of the monarch can lead the lives they want & not be bound by a duty they didn't ask for. In the end they might be happier & more fulfilled.

The crown as an institution will endure because the alternative is a republic & there is no real appetite for that. Not in this realm at least, I can't speculate about the others.


A smaller official Royal Family seems the way forward. The current apparatus is based on the needs of HM in the 1950's and 1960's, before reliable television from so many parts of the world, before improved airline transport and before the internet. A Royal tour by a cousin of the Queen could take months back then. Nowadays, Charles can be in Cardiff, Oslo, Cairo and Bucharest inside of a week and still spend his Sunday in Highgrove.


The Queen is right in saying that she "has to be seen". Charles will have to be seen as well when he is Monarch.

The other official royals might not need the full rig of recce visits, police outriders, etc. that goes on now. It's very expensive.
 
The present model of having a royal family support the monarch may be on the way out. It is after all a relatively recent phenomena. It might be to the good if relatives of the monarch can lead the lives they want & not be bound by a duty they didn't ask for. In the end they might be happier & more fulfilled.

But who holds the purse strings?
Yes the RF can work; but would they have the jobs they have if not for their royal status?
In the end it all comes down to money.
 
The main focus under the next reign will be Charles, Camilla, William, Catherine, Harry and Meghan.

But i think Anne, Edward and Sophie will continue with what they are already doing for as long as they want to or have the health. Can anyone see the hardest working Princess Anne going from high speed to zero over a night ? I can’t. And Edward is taking over The Duke of Edinburgh’s Award.

Andrew’s days as a star is over.

Beatrice and Eugenie will continue to do what they do now and help their uncle when they are needed but they will never be asked to become full time working royals unless a terrible catastrohe happens in Charles’ family.

The Gloucester and Kent branches are soon over anyway.
The Duke and Duchess of Gloucester may continue for awhile but their children are 100 % private citizens and will remain so.

The Duke and Duchess of Kent and Princess Alexandra will likely retire completely soon.
Prince and Princess Michael of Kent have never been a part of the firm and only represents when they are asked to (basically when no one else have time to go).
Their children are all private citizens and will remain so.

The monarchy will undoubtly consist of much fewer working members in the future but i think the transition will happen naturally.
 
Last edited:
Can anyone see the hardest working Princess Anne going from high speed to zero over a night ? I can’t. .

Actually I think if Anne was given the opportunity she would like to make a real go at horse breading , managing Team GP Horse jumping - there is probably hundreds of things Anne would rather be doing.

The problem is they feel duty bound to do this role for the Queen and Country and therefore she (ie - the Queen , not Charles or editor of the Telegraph) who has to right to ask/tell Andrew to stop. She also can only tell him to stop doing things as a representative of the crown , he can continue doing them as an individual.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom