🇬🇧 U.K.: From prince to private citizen

🇬🇧 U.K.: A Statement From Buckingham Palace

Here is the entire text of the statement, verbatim from the BBC, with specific words and phrases highlighted for semiotic analysis below:

1️⃣ What is happening?

After years of accusations by one of Epstein and Andrew’s most prominent accusers, Virginia Giuffre died in April this year by suicide. Earlier this month, her posthumous memoir Nobody’s Girl was released in which she stated that she was forced to have sex with (at the time) Prince Andrew at least three times, amongst several other horrifying claims.

Andrew has been under scrutiny for his association with Epstein for years now, with increasing pressure since a photo of himself with a very young Giuffre from 2001 surfaced. This was followed by several rejections from Andrew, including the now infamous Newsnight interview in 2019 with the BBC that has to go down as one of the worst PR decisions made in the last decade.

But it was only this year that further public anger with the royal family along with the suicide of Giuffre that questions were asked as to how Andrew was able to sustain a rich lifestyle, and more importantly why. What did the family know about Andrew’s association with Epstein? It is an issue that refuses to go away. This month King Charles’s visit to the Vatican was overshadowed by emails being leaked that proved Andrew had maintained contact with Epstein in 2011 months after he claimed their relationship had ended.

This public scrutiny inevitably grew to include the finances and privileges enjoyed by Andrew, with the royal family coming under criticism for protecting one of their own. This week, the royal family decided they had had enough and have moved to draw a line under this situation.

2️⃣ What was written, and to whom?

The statement says it is from ‘Buckingham Palace’ which is not only a royal residence, but also the administrative headquarters for the British royal family. The statement is effectively from the office of the king, but can be read more accurately as a directive from King Charles III himself to the general public.

DECONSTRUCTING THE TEXT

🗝️ Unlocking Meaning

About two weeks ago, Buckingham Palace issued a statement on behalf of, at the time, Prince Andrew. In it, Andrew claimed that he would ‘no longer use my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me’. The understanding was that Andrew would voluntarily stop using the honours Prince, Duke of York, Earl of Inverness, and Baron Killyleagh.

The latest statement goes further by saying that Andrew will no longer have the right to be called His Royal Highness, along with the crown removing the honours of Order of the Garter and Knight Grand Cross of the Victorian Order. Critically, even though Andrew had given up using his titles, the fact that King Charles felt it necessary to remove his brother’s choice from the matter and make it plain that this was the King’s choice is important. This was the statement of a King making his will known to all his subjects — his brother was no longer going to take advantage of the largesse of the crown.

It is important to note that there is no use of any familial language in the statement. There is no reference to the king being the brother of Andrew. Even King Charles is referred to in the third person. This linguistic distance between the king and his own brother shows just how far the family wants to create daylight between themselves and Andrew.

At least officially.

👑 Power Play

It is understood that prior to the statement being released the wider royal family and the government of the U.K. were consulted. Such a major move can only be seen as an attempt by the King to placate rising public anger and annoyance with the family’s behaviour with regards to Andrew. However, through some bizarre finagling and obtuse ancient royal law, despite being stripped of all titles, Andrew remains eighth in line to the throne.

Despite the reality that Andrew will never be king, the King cannot disown him, even if doing so would bring a lot less heat and scrutiny on himself and, crucially, his and the family’s private wealth. There were already several questions being raised about the private wealth of Andrew, who will now move into Sandringham Estate, which is the King’s private house. Andrew will also now be dependent on his older brother’s private wealth for sustenance.

With this, the public’s questioning of use of public funds to maintain Andrew’s lavish lifestyle has been addressed. But questions still abound about the family’s knowledge of Andrew’s relationship with Epstein, and the family’s massive yet hidden private wealth.

King Charles has imposed his power on his younger brother and bought the family some breathing space. But with this story seemingly never dying, it’s possible that this is only a temporary reprieve.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

Tell me your reasoning. In next week’s issue, I’ll highlight the most thought-provoking responses.

LAST WEEK’S RESPONSES

I appreciate the fact check. It’s true that based on the definition of ‘highest office’, France still has not yet had a female president. I was counting prime ministers, which are not the highest offices in France.

Regarding comparing the LDP and the PAP, my point was to highlight that even the major industrialised liberal democracy of Japan has had a single party rule (either outright or as senior partner in a coalition) for most of it’s modern existence, like Singapore and the PAP. Which makes Singapore’s political status not as unique as people might think.

Was this forwarded to you? Signpost is a free weekly newsletter analysing meaning and power through language. It’s free to subscribe.

Think somebody else would enjoy this? Send them here.