LONDON (AP) — King Charles III’ s brother was under arrest. Police were searching two royal properties, and news commentators were endlessly discussing the details of a sex scandal with tentacles that stretched to the gates of Buckingham Palace.
So how did Britain’s royal family spend Thursday afternoon? The king sat in the front row on the first day of London Fashion Week. Queen Camilla attended a lunchtime concert, and Princess Anne visited a prison.
The decision to continue normal royal duties was more than just an example of British stoicism in the face of the monarchy’s biggest crisis in almost a century. It was the opening act of the House of Windsor’s fight for survival as the arrest of the former Prince Andrew threatens to undermine public backing for the monarchy.
After pledging to support the police investigation into his brother's friendship with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, the king stressed his intentions.
“My family and I will continue in our duty and service to you all,” he said in a statement signed “Charles R.,” using the abbreviation for Rex, the Latin word for king.
The simple fact that Charles made the statement showed the scale of the problem created by the arrest of the king’s 66-year-old sibling, now known as Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, who was held for 11 hours and then released under investigation, meaning he was neither charged nor exonerated.
The event was so unprecedented that commentators had to reach back to the 1640s and the arrest and execution of King Charles I during the English Civil War to find a parallel.
Mountbatten-Windsor's arrest on suspicion of misconduct in public office is shaping up to be the monarchy’s biggest crisis since Edward VIII abdicated in 1936 to marry an American divorcee, Wallis Simpson.
That scandal weakened public support for the monarchy, which did not fully recover for 15 years. The turnaround came only after Edward’s successor, King George VI, refused to flee Britain during World War II, demonstrating his solidarity with a nation ravaged by Nazi bombs.
Even before she ascended the throne, Queen Elizabeth II followed her father’s lead and publicly pledged her life in service to Britain.
But while the impact of Edward’s abdication lingered for years, the crisis reached a crescendo in a few days. And the solution in that case was relatively simple: Edward stepped aside, and his oldest brother took his place.
By contrast, the drama surrounding Mountbatten-Windsor is ongoing, with no end in sight.
The current crisis stems from revelations about the relationship between the former prince and Epstein that were uncovered when the U.S. Justice Department released millions of pages of documents last month from its investigation into Epstein.
Police have previously cited reports that Mountbatten-Windsor sent trade information to Epstein, a wealthy investor, in 2010, when the former prince was Britain’s special envoy for international trade.
At least eight U.K. police forces have said they are looking into issues raised by the documents.
Compared with previous royal scandals, "this time there doesn’t seem to be any clear route forward,’’ said Ed Owens, author of “After Elizabeth: Can the Monarchy Save Itself?” “There’s no blueprint to follow” in terms of how the monarchy and associated organizations deal with the allegations.
The last time the monarchy had to manage these kinds of questions was after the death of Princess Diana, Charles’ ex-wife. Elizabeth and Charles were criticized for failing to respond to the outpouring of public grief as tens of thousands of people swarmed to Kensington Gardens to lay flowers outside the late princess’ home. Some even called for Charles to step aside as heir to the throne in favor of his son William.
The queen later commissioned focus groups to better understand the public mood and determine why people felt so strongly about a person they never met. The crisis forced the royals to recognize that Diana’s common touch had connected with people in ways that had not yet occurred to the House of Windsor.
Those lessons have since inspired other royals, including Diana’s sons, Princes William and Harry, to be more informal and approachable.
But this moment is different, in part because it is taking place in a rapidly changing media environment at a time when people are demanding transparency from their leaders.
Moving forward also means facing uncomfortable questions about what the institution — and the family members themselves — may have known about Mountbatten-Windsor’s activities. The palace has sought to draw a bold line separating the former prince and the rest of the monarchy by stripping him of his titles, including the right to be called a prince.
In another blow for the former prince, the British government is considering formally removing him from the line of succession to the crown. Despite losing his status and his honors, Andrew remains eighth in line to the throne. That can only be changed with legislation.
Charles is the first monarch “that has to meet our expectations of figures in public life, which is to be accountable and to explain yourself,” said Craig Prescott, a royal expert at Royal Holloway, University of London. “And you always have to work to earn the support of the public. And that is a particular challenge when you’re facing a controversy such as Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor.”
Critics argue that the monarchy was slow to respond to the pressure, given that Mountbatten-Windsor’s links to Epstein have been discussed for more than a decade.
The best outcome for the monarchy is for the police investigation to focus solely on the information in the Epstein files and how that relates to Mountbatten-Windsor, said Peter Hunt, a former BBC royal correspondent. The worst outcome would be if police expand their inquiries to what the broader institution might have known and when.
"Were questions raised about his behavior as a trade envoy over those 10 years? Were they answered? What did people do about them?’’ Hunt said on the BBC.
And perhaps there's more to learn.
“Will there be files?’’ he asked.
