King Charles has just come under fire for the way he has changed things for Prince William.
It has all been commented on by royal biographer Christopher Anderson.
He spoke in one of his most recent interviews with OK magazine.
During that time he issued a dire warning to the King about the way he was manipulating his remaining royals.
In Mr Anderson's view, “the simple truth is that the royal family cannot be reduced to a few precious members without risking complete paralysis.”
Because “for more than 70 years, the Windsors had longevity on their side, almost to a ridiculous degree.”
“Queen Elizabeth lived to be 96 and her husband, Prince Philip, 99, the oldest royal male in history. [when he died].”
“The Queen Mother drank her favourite gin and Dubonnets to the very end, at the astonishing age of 101.”
“There seemed no need for redundancy, as the senior royals seemed virtually immortal and there were three generations of future monarchs waiting in the wings.”
But recent changes have turned everything on its head, especially in the case of Kate Middleton because, “it's hard to blame palace officials for not having a plan in place to deal with the simultaneous cancer diagnoses of King Charles and Princess Kate, let alone the sidelining of such a valuable supporting actor as the royal princess” given the past they worked with.
In short, “the home team is running out of options,” he added.
Even royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliam agreed with this idea, admitting that King Charles' plan is now starting to prove incredibly “impractical” as “Princess Anne's accident this week shows what can happen, quite unexpectedly.”
“It was she who recently said that a small monarchy was not viable. It depends on what you want from the royal family.”
