Royal family: next generation’s turn to step up

The retirement of Prince Philip puts pressure on the young royals to do more officials duties.

The Queen has hinted she wants the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry to do more official duties.

“Dear Philip,” began an open letter from the Daily Mirror’s editors after yet another slip of the Duke of Edinburgh’s tongue, this one involving a hideously inappro­priate anecdote about cricket bats after the Dunblane massacre in 1996.

“You are,” the letter went on, “an ­arrogant, overbearing, insensitive, tact­less, patronising, selfish, boorish, out-of-touch and now sickening fool ... zip up or zip off. We don’t mind which.”

What a difference 20 years makes. When Buckingham Palace announced last week that the Queen’s 95-year-old consort was finally making plans to retreat to a well-earned retirement after a lifetime of public service, a divided ­nation came instantly together in a near-unanimous outpouring of gratitude and admiration for a unique royal career.

Even the Daily Mirror — yes, that same incorrigible, Philip-bashing Daily Mirror — hailed the prince’s “remarkable record of supporting his wife and our Queen through a period of incredible change ... few are as deserving of retirement as the widely respected prince”. That a soon-to-be 96-year-old prince should have decided to take it easy later this year — once he has polished off another busy round of official engagements — can scarcely be deemed a surprise, although one royal source noted that of the household staff summoned to a Buckingham Palace meeting on Thursday, “precious few knew what they were about to be told”.

The impending retirement inevitably inspired a flood of national affection yet the future of the Queen’s Greek-born consort was only part of a broader and more complex royal story that does not quite lend itself to jolly reminiscence about tarts’ bedrooms, Indian-installed fuse boxes, diseased koalas and many other targets of Philip’s wandering wit.

The House of Windsor knows it is heading for a watershed moment in royal history when the Queen’s record-breaking reign must be replaced by something new — something that will not necessarily be greeted with unanimous acclaim.

“I don’t think this announcement is the end of the story, more the beginning,” said a senior royal source. “There may be more changes afoot.” It is already clear that not all members of the royal family may be happy with what comes next.

When it first emerged that ­palace ­officials had summoned household staff to what was described as a “secret” ­meeting, the undercurrents of alarm were palpable. Had someone died? Was someone seriously ill?

For a few hours early on Thursday, as television crews converged on Buckingham Palace, the pound wobbled and it was hard not to fear the worst. Almost inevitably there was an internet accident and The Sun was obliged to apologise for prematurely publishing a story on its website headlined “Prince Philip dead at 95”. Someone had pressed the wrong button, a Sun spokesman explained: “Everyone here is mortified by this.”

At the palace, staff were ­addressed by Sir Christopher Geidt, the Queen’s ­private secretary, who according to royal sources devoted only a fifth of his remarks to Philip’s retirement.

“It was more about what this change enables Buckingham Palace to do and what opportunities that represents,” one source said.

At stake, it has since become clear, are not just the future arrangements of an elderly royal couple with several quite pleasant retirement homes to choose from — there is every chance, given the family’s remarkable record of ­longevity, that the Queen will one day have to send herself a card marking her own 100th birthday.

Royal insiders are talking of a huge shift in the monarchy’s focus, away from what one source ­described as “personality-led” ­issues towards a more traditional ceremonial role emphasising ­continuity and stability — “to be a focus for the nation in national and inter­national moments”.

The source added: “Some people might say that the monarchy isn’t a ­company or a personality-led organi­sation. The feeling is that the duke’s ­retirement means everyone must step up to help the Queen and focus more on what the monarchy is there to do, not what it can achieve by dint of who the personalities are.”

In short, Buckingham Palace seeks agreement on the question: “What is the modern monarchy for?” Is it about dashing princes adopting issues of the day and using their celebrity muscle to promote solutions? Or should the royals stick to ceremony and leave issues to the professionals? And does the public understand the sometimes contrasting dynamics of separate royal households — with the Queen at Buckingham Palace, the Prince of Wales at Clarence House and the Duke of Cambridge at Kensington Palace?

“We need to operate more as the ­public sees us, as one family delivering for the state,” said one royal source. “This change [Philip’s retirement] is the opportunity to realign the households.”

It all seems a very far cry from that start­ling moment in June 1921 when ­Princess Alice of Battenberg, the wife of Prince Andrew of Greece and Denmark, gave birth on the dining-room table of a Corfu villa to an infant son named Philippos, who would later be embarrassed at successive schools by his lack of a proper surname. He eventually became known as Philip of Greece and Denmark.

“I just had to get on with it. You do. One does,” Philip later recalled with characteristic brevity of a ­tumultuous upbringing that ­included the overthrow of the Greek monarchy and his family’s expulsion from the country.

At his first school, a progressive American kindergarten in Paris, Philip made his mark by swapping a gold trinket given to him by Britain’s King George V for something much more exciting — “a state-of-the-art three-colour pencil”, ­according to his biographer, Philip Eade.

Settling in England after his mother suffered a psychological breakdown, he was a boarder at Cheam School, then in Surrey, where one poet noted much later that the headmaster Harold Taylor “lay his cane athwart / the bottom of a prince consort”. More discipline awaited him at Gordonstoun, then a spartan new Scottish boarding school, where contemporaries noted that he “never swanked about his relatives”, some of whom turned out to be Nazis.

His princely heritage earned him invitations to royal occasions and it was in July 1939, when he was attending the naval college at Dartmouth, in Devon, that he seems first to have caught the eye of Princess Elizabeth, the 13-year-old daughter of King George VI. As the royal yacht departed, Eade reports, it was pursued by a young blond oarsman “rowing furiously in their wake”. Through her binoculars Elizabeth watched her future husband slowly disappearing. They were married in 1947.

There have been many attempts over the decades to link Philip to other women — most ­notably in recent reports that the upcoming second season of the popular television series The Crown will revive allegations of an affair — yet no serious scandal has tainted one of the most remarkable royal marriages of this or any other century.

Philip’s agonies adjusting to a life of walking a few steps behind his wife have been well charted. In the early days, one courtier noted, he was “constantly being squashed, snubbed, ticked off, rapped over the knuckles” by an establishment suspicious of his motives and his sway over the Queen. He once referred to ­himself bitterly as a “refugee ­husband”.

Yet in 2007, when the couple celebrated their 60th wedding ­anniversary, Lady Pamela Hicks, a cousin to both of them, noted that the Queen “still lights up when he walks into the room”.

They will mark their 70th anniversary together in November and although by then the duke will ­officially have withdrawn from public life, sources say the palace is discussing a possible public event. “Of course they understand that there will be a great warmth ­towards them on that occasion, so it would be fair to assume that it will be marked in some way,” the source said.

Given the miseries that the monarchy endured in the wake of the Queen’s “annus horribilis” of 1992 — when Prince Andrew separated from the Duchess of York, Princess Anne divorced, Andrew Morton published his bombshell account of the doomed marriage of Diana, Princess of Wales and Prince Charles and, to cap it all, Windsor Castle caught fire — Philip’s role as the Queen’s most steadfast guide and supporter can now be seen as crucial to the stability of the 21st-century monarchy. It far outweighs the damage caused by his occasional spasms of racist, sexist or otherwise bewilderingly inappropriate outbursts — politely referred to these days as “gaffes”.

The list is embarrassingly long and only partly explained by the duke’s understandable desire to say something — anything — that might break the ice in an awkward encounter. Yet last week it was clear that where once he was ­assailed for warning a British student in China that he might become “slitty-eyed”, or for asking Australian Aboriginal dancers if they “still throw spears at each other”, many Britons are prepared to overlook the rougher edges of his personality.

“No matter how wide he opens his mouth or how deeply his foot becomes lodged in it, people never stay offended for long,” observed The Times.

In less than a year Philip has lost two of his closest aides: Sir Brian McGrath, his former private secretary and equerry and the only member of the royal household who was allowed to bring his own dog to work; and Anne Griffiths, his long-serving librarian and archivist. Suggestions that the duke’s decision to step down was hastened by the deaths of two ­people so close to him were said by royal sources to be wide of the mark.

“In recent weeks and months the duke had become conscious of the relentless pace of engagements and that it was becoming difficult,” a source explained.

“After discussions with the Queen, his thoughts crystallised over Easter so he took the decision on his own terms. He’s been very much at the helm of how the announcement has been handled”.

There has been no suggestion that pressing health problems were a factor. What seems to be a key part of a delicate royal equation is the nature of the transition that everyone knows must lie ahead. What exactly does a realignment of the households mean? Is this a veiled signal to Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry that they have to be careful about ­focusing their royal time and prestige too narrowly? Prince Harry is due in Australia early next month to promote the Invictus Games, the international sporting competition for wounded, injured and sick servicemen and women founded by the prince in 2014. Prince William earlier this year said he would be stepping down as an air ambulance pilot earlier this year, presumably to do more ­official duties.

Philip is involved with 800 charities and organisations, not all of which require the same attention. He remains the founder and patron of the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award, a magnificent charitable endeavour that has helped more than 2.5 million people in the UK.

At his meeting with Buckingham Palace staff, sources said Geidt emphasised that the duke’s retirement was “an opportunity to pause, reflect and refocus as a ­family”. The source added: “It wasn’t draconian finger-wagging, but it was about: let’s all remember what we’re here for and what we’re doing it for; let’s make sure we’re all at the Commonwealth Day ­service, opening tea shops, attending flood disasters — things the public expects the monarchy to be doing.”

The source went on: “Refocusing ... means less individual royal activity than there has been in ­recent times ... big things like Heads Together [the mental health campaign launched by Harry and the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge] might be too much. As successful as that campaign was, it might be that soul-baring isn’t what Buckingham Palace is looking for ... that must be secondary to the business of state.”

It escaped no one that Geidt was obviously speaking with the full authority of the Queen who, sources emphasise, has no plan at this stage to join her husband in ­retirement.

“The Queen will categorically not be doing any less,” another source said.

“It’s now about other members of the royal family doing a bit more because of the duke’s decision.”

The realignment is already in hand at Kensington Palace, which the Duke and Duchess of ­Cambridge will make a more ­permanent base with Prince ­George and Princess Charlotte later this year. “Their overall volume of work in support of the Queen will continue to increase,” another royal source confirmed.

Less clear is the potential for friction should the emphasis on ceremonial duties begin to conflict with the younger generation’s desire to get stuck into individual issues. “It’s not a choice between one or the other,” one source insisted.

“Showing strong leadership on issues of concern to the public ... is equally the bread-and-butter work of the royal family in support of the institutional mission.”

The source added: “The signal from Sir Christopher [Geidt] was clearly that as the Queen gets older without the duke at her side, she will be wanting to get more support. That was an important message to have underlined for everyone.”

When the Daily Mirror took aim at Philip in that 1996 broadside, it described him as “an unmitigated disaster ... who cannot behave like a royal in a modern democracy”. The duke may not ­always have expressed himself royally, but there are few today who would question the “refugee husband’s” devotion to the Queen and the British throne.

The Sunday Times