Kate Middleton and Prince William rang in their 12th wedding anniversary on Saturday, as Kensington Palace released a new photo of the couple to mark the special occasion.
“12 years ❤️,” reads the Instagram caption for the picture, which was taken by one of the couple’s favored photographers, Matt Porteous.
In the relaxed shot, the Prince and Princess of Wales are posed on bicycles with their arms around each other, smiling at the camera. Both are dressed in casual outfits, with William in a blue collared shirt, jeans and sunglasses.
Kate wears a patterned white shirt, jeans and white sneakers, while carrying a crossbody purse.
The photo might look familiar to any avid royal watcher, as it was among those taken at the family’s Sandringham Estate in Norfolk, England, last year.
William and Kate used one of those snaps for their 2022 Christmas card, which featured their three children: Prince George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis. Other photos from the shoot were used to mark Mother’s Day in the UK.
The Princess of Wales recently made a cameo in another royal family picture to mark Louis’ 5th birthday last weekend. A smiling Kate was shown carrying Louis as he perched in a wheelbarrow with a big grin on his face.
The new picture of Louis was taken by photographer Millie Pilkington, in a break from tradition. Normally, Kate takes shots of her family for big milestones, as she is an avid photographer herself.
The royals are gearing up for a historic weekend next month, as the UK prepares for the coronation of King Charles III and Queen Camilla.
Prince George, a future heir to the throne, is set to play a major role in the ceremony, as he will be one of his grandfather’s pages of honour on May 6.
The three new images, all taken in March at Buckingham Palace and snapped by photographer Hugo Burnand, show the couple in a particularly stately-looking room called the Blue Drawing Room.
Advertisement
So, what’s the big deal?
Well, it seems there are a few hidden symbols in the images which suggest Charles is drawing on the past that comes with his new hereditary role.
In his image, the monarch is sat in a rare chair (one of a suite of 12) which dates back to 1828. It was supplied to King George IV for the furnishing of Windsor Castle who reigned between 1820 and 1830 – making it fancy and particularly old.
The monarch is also sitting in front of a State Portrait of King George V, which was painted after his own coronation. As Charles’s great-grandfather who reigns between 1910 and 1936, the parallels won’t have been lost on the monarch as he took to the throne more than a century later.
George V is also wearing Naval uniform with his Robe of State, or parliamentary Robe. Perhaps that’s a nod to how Charles is expected to don his own Admiral of the Fleet uniform for his coronation, bucking the trend for male monarchs to wear stockings breeches.
Advertisement
Charles, meanwhile, looks pretty relaxed in the image, smiling casually and looking straight at the camera.
There were two more royal hints in Camilla’s photo as well. She adopted a very similar pose to her husband in her image, but swapped out the chair.
This upholstery has a rich history too, dating back to 1812. According to the Palace, it was probably commissioned by King George IV when he was Prince of Wales – the very same title Charles held for more than 70 years. One of a set of just two, this furniture has only been in the Blue Drawing Room since at least the early 20th Century.
Also sitting in front of George V’s portrait, the Queen Consort was wearing a blue – royal blue, might we add – crepe coat dress, and pearl drop earrings set with a sapphire and ruby which used to belong to the late Queen, but a pearl necklace from her own collection.
Advertisement
This is perhaps a gentle nod to her mother-in-law, who died in September.
Tom Parker Bowles expertly dodged a question about his stepbrother, Prince Harry, during an appearance on The News Agents podcast with Jon Sopel and Emily Maitlis last week.
The food writer and critic, who is the son of the former Camilla Parker Bowles, was asked by Maitlis if “there’s a panic about whether Harry would come or not” to King Charles and Queen Camilla’s coronation, which takes place on May 6.
Advertisement
Parker Bowles replied that the decision had “nothing to do with me”, before jokingly saying he and his son were concerned about whether Harry Kane, captain of England’s national team, was coming to the coronation.
The 48-year-old also defended his mother from those that may speculate that she always wanted to be queen.
“I think change happens, but I don’t care what anyone says, this wasn’t any sort of end game,” the writer said. “She married the person she loved and this is what happened.”
Advertisement
Maitlis ― a journalist who conducted the infamous Prince Andrew interview in 2019 that led to him stepping back as a working royal ― also asked Parker Bowles if it was “weird” to think of his mother as queen.
“Not really because she’s still our mother,” Parker Bowles answered. “I say ‘our’ but not the royal ‘we,’ speaking for my sister [Laura Lopes] and me. She’s our mother.”
And despite his mother’s new title, Parker Bowles insisted he will not be given one of his own.
“I become nothing,” the writer said with a laugh. “There’d be revolution if they started handing it out to people like me… You’re not going to find us with great estates, being called the ‘duke of whatever.’ No, that would be appalling.”
He also defended those who may protest at the coronation ― like the anti-monarchy group, Republic ― telling the podcast hosts that “everyone has the right to think what they want”.
Advertisement
“You know, going back to Extinction Rebellion and Animal Rebellion and Republic and whatever it is, everyone has a right to their say,” he said. “We live in, thankfully, a free country.”
He added that “if people want to protest that’s their right to do so”.
Charles’ coronation will be held at Westminster Abbey next month, though he became king when his mother, Queen Elizabeth, died in September of last year.
Buckingham Palace recently revealed that the Duke of Sussex will be in attendance at the ceremony, while Meghan Markle will remain in California, as it is the couple’s son Archie’s fourth birthday.
Buckingham Palace has said that King Charles takes a new research project looking into the British royal family’s connection to slavery “profoundly seriously” in a significant new statement on Thursday.
The palace issued a statement after it was contacted by The Guardian, following the news organisation’s discovery of a document from the Royal African Company, which at one point held a monopoly in the British slave trade, showing a transfer to King William III in 1689.
Advertisement
“This is an issue that His Majesty takes profoundly seriously,” the palace said before citing the king’s speech at the opening ceremony of the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Rwanda last year.
In the speech, Charles spoke of “the depths of my personal sorrow at the suffering of so many as I continue to deepen my own understanding of slavery’s enduring impact”.
The palace said that Charles’ “process has continued with vigour and determination since His Majesty’s accession” before mentioning how the institution is aiding the research project investigating “the links between the British monarchy and the transatlantic slave trade during the late 17th and 18th centuries”.
The statement concluded: “As part of that drive, the royal household is supporting this research through access to the royal collection and the royal archives.”
Advertisement
The PhD project in question comes from historian Camilla de Koning, co-sponsored by the Historic Royal Palaces charity. The research is expected to conclude in 2026.
The royals have increasingly faced calls to apologize for their role in the slave trade, as some groups have also called for reparations.
Prince William condemned slavery as “abhorrent” during the then-Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s controversial tour of the Caribbean last year.
“I strongly agree with my father, the Prince of Wales, who said in Barbados last year that the appalling atrocity of slavery forever stains our history,” William said during a speech in Jamaica in March 2022. “I want to express my profound sorrow. Slavery was abhorrent. And it should never have happened.”
If anyone utters the words Princess Diana, you know her iconic revenge dress will come up in conversation. You cannot talk about the late princess without talking about the picture of her walking out of that car in that black Christina Sambolian dress.
The moment was also recreated in the fifth season of The Crown, with Elizabeth Debicki emulating the late royal.
Advertisement
The dress was dubbed the revenge dress because of the fact that she chose to wear it on the day the then-Prince Charles admitted to having an affair with his now-wife Camila Parker Bowles on national television.
But as it turns out, the iconic revenge dress was actually supposed to be white in colour.
The designer recalled her interaction with the late Princess and how the dress came to be in the new book Diana: A Life in Dresses by ACC Art Books.
“It was 2 o’clock on a Saturday afternoon in September,” Christina Sambolian recalled in the book, “I thought that the woman looked familiar. We all laughed when we realised it really was her.”
After the princess shopped at her store, she told the designer: “I want a special dress for a special occasion. It doesn’t matter if it is short or long. It has to be something special.”
Advertisement
Sambolian then drew a few sketches on a piece of paper. The dress was revealing, quite short and showed some skin.
Diana was not sure about it and thought it was a bit risky, recalls the designer.
“I said: “Why not be daring?” But she wanted everything more covered up, longer and the neck higher. The dress was brave and revealing,” she recalled.
”Finally, she said yes to the style – then we moved on to the colour. I had black in my mind, but she wanted cream,” said Sambolian.
“To me, Diana was a black and white sort of person. That was the way she was – there were no grey areas. I thought of black for the colour. I thought of her in a sophisticated way. I didn’t like her in the pale pinks and blues with lots of beading,” she added.
Advertisement
It took two dressmakers more than 60 hours to make the dress. For three years, Diana did not wear the dress. The designer had lost hope that her dress would ever be worn by the Princess.
“Three years went by and she hadn’t worn it,” she said. “I was very disappointed. Then I realised she had been waiting for the right occasion. She looked like a beautiful black bird in it.”
But then that fateful day came when Diana had to attend the Serpentine Ball. She had originally planned to wear a Valentino gown to the event. But when she found out that Valentino had rung up the media, telling them that the Princess would be wearing the brand’s dress to the Ball, she was furious.
So she decided to go with the now iconic black dress she will always be remembered for.
And there you have it. That is how the revenge dress was born, which would be emulated by many, many people for decades and generations to come.
Prince Harry has given the world access to his own life like no royal ever has before – and not just through his new memoir Spare.
The Duke of Sussex has gone on a bombshell-filled media tour to promote his autobiography, from intense 90 minutes with ITV to a tequila-fuelled more light-hearted appearance on late night US TV.
Advertisement
Here’s a round-up of some of the most insightful things the royal said.
Released: January 8
1. Harry accused some royals of ‘getting into bed with the devil’
“After many, many years of lies being told about me and my family, there comes a point where again, going back to the relationship between certain members of the family and the tabloid press, those certain members have decided to get into bed with the devil,” the Duke claimed.
“If you need to do that, or you want to do that, you choose to do that – well, that is a choice. That’s up to you.
“But the moment that rehabilitation comes at the detriment of others – me, other members of my family – then that’s where I draw the line.”
Advertisement
2. Harry denies that he ever suggested the Royal Family was racist
When Bradby noted that the Duke of Sussex had “accused members of your family of racism” in the Winfrey interview, Harry pushed back.
“No, I didn’t. The British press said that,” Harry said. “Did Meghan ever mention that they’re racist?”
Bradby mentioned Meghan’s revelation that “there were troubling comments about Archie’s skin colour”.
“There was concern about his skin colour,” Harry replied.
“Right. Wouldn’t you describe that as essentially racist?” Bradby followed up.
“I wouldn’t,” Harry said. “Not having lived within that family.”
“The difference between racism and unconscious bias, the two things are different,” he continued. “But once it’s been acknowledged, or pointed out to you as an individual, or as an institution, that you have unconscious bias, you therefore have an opportunity to learn and grow from that in order so that you are part of the solution rather than part of the problem. Otherwise, unconscious bias then moves into the category of racism.”
Advertisement
3. Harry wants Charles and William ‘back’
Harry says he wants “a family, not an institution”, and says “they’ve shown absolutely no willingness to reconcile”.
He also talks about King Charles and Prince William. “I would like to get my father back,” he says. “I would like to have my brother back.”
But, Harry added, “At the moment, I don’t recognise them,” he said of his father and brother, noting: “As much as they probably don’t recognise me.”
4. William ordered Harry to shave his beard off for his wedding
The Duke revealed that his older sibling had ordered him to go clean shaven for his 2018 wedding.
He explained: “I think there’s a level of competition there. I remembered that William had a beard himself and that Granny, and other people, the ones to tell him – told him that he had to shave it off.”
He said the difference was that the beard was “a shield to my anxiety” – but that he thought William still “found it hard that other people told him to shave it off”.
Advertisement
5. Harry and Meghan ‘love’ Lady Susan Hussey
Hussey, a former royal aide, was criticised last year for making racist comments towards charity boss Ngozi Fulani at the Palace, and subsequently stepped down.
Harry touched on the incident in his interview and said he was “very happy” that the Palace had organised a reconciliatory meeting between the two parties, as he and Meghan “love Susan Hussey”.
He added: “And I also know that what she meant – she never meant any hard at all. But the response from the British press, and from people online because of the stories that they wrote was horrendous.”
He said he and Meghan had only ever wanted the same kind of “accountability” from the royals – but pointed out the Palace had not even introduced the diversity tsar they had promised to back in 2021.
“I’ve always been open to wanting to help them understand their part in it, and especially when you are the monarchy – you have a responsibility, and quite rightly people hold you to a higher standard than others.”
Advertisement
6. Harry’s fury over Jeremy Clarkson’s column – and the Palace’s inaction
Clarkson faced a widespread backlash in December when he wrote in an opinion column for The Sun that he “hates” the Duchess of Sussex on a “cellular level”.
Speaking to ITV, the Duke of Sussex brought up the piece of his own accord while discussing “accountability”.
Harry said: “Not only was what he said horrific, and is hurtful and cruel towards my wife, but it also encourages other people around the UK, and around the world – men particularly – to think that it’s acceptable to treat women that way.
“To use my stepmother’s words recently as well, there is a global pandemic of violence against women.”
He also said he was frustrated by the royals’ silence, while his wife continues to receive criticism from the press. He said: “The world is asking for some form of comment from the monarchy but the silence is deafening. To put it mildly.
Advertisement
“Everything to do with my wife, after six years, they haven’t said a single thing.”
7. Harry defends writing about his family
On why now felt like the right time to write his memoir, Harry told Bradby: “38 years of having my story told by so many different people with intentional spin and distortion felt like a good time to own my story and be able to tell it for myself.
“You know, I don’t, I don’t think that if I was still part of the institution that I would have been given this chance to.
“So, I’m actually really grateful that I’ve had the opportunity to tell my story because it’s my story to tell.”
Asked what his brother would have to say after reading Spare, Harry continued: “He’d probably say all sorts of different things.
“But you know, for the last however many years, let’s just focus on the last six years, the level of planting and leaking from other members of the family means that in my mind they have written countless books – certainly millions of words have been dedicated to trying to trash my wife and myself to the point of where I had to leave my country.”
Advertisement
8. Harry rejects claims he has burnt his bridges
Bradby put to Harry that he’d not so much “burned bridges” with his family as “taken a flamethrower to them”, although that’s now how the Duke saw it.
“Silence only allows the abuser to abuse. I’m not sure how honesty is burning bridges,” he replied.
9. Harry is still hopeful of a family reconciliation
“I genuinely believe, and I hope, that reconciliation between my family and us will have a ripple effect across the entire world,” he said. “Maybe that’s lofty, maybe that’s naïve, whatever. But I genuinely feel that.
“And knowing the monarchy as I know it from something that I was brought up in, for me it’s always been about uniting people.”
However, he added: “They’ve shown absolutely no willingness to reconcile up until this point.”
10. Harry said the royals ‘stereotyped’ Meghan
Harry said William and Kate never got on with Meghan “from the get-go”, and that there was “a lot” of stereotyping her as a “divorced biracial American actress”.
Anderson Cooper: 60 Minutes, CBS
Released: January 8
Advertisement
11. Harry says he was ‘probably bigoted’ before meeting Meghan
The Duke was touching on the struggles many newcomers to the royal family face when he said: “What Meghan had to go through, in some part, was similar to what Kate and Camilla went through.”
However, he added that the women faced “very different circumstances”.
“But then you add in the race element, which was what the press – the British press – jumped on straightaway. I went into this incredibly naive.
“I had no idea the British press were so bigoted. How I was probably bigoted before the relationship with Meghan.”
“You think you were bigoted before the relationship with Meghan?” Cooper pressed.
“I don’t know,” Harry answered. “Put it this way – I didn’t see what I now see.”
12. Harry didn’t believe Diana was actually dead ‘for a long time’
He said for “many many years” he did not believe she had actually died, adding: “I refused to accept she was gone.”
13. Harry claimed again that Palace leak royal stories
Harry spoke about leaks to the press and the royal family’s motto of “never complain, never explain”, while claiming that some royal correspondents are “spoon-fed information” to write stories.
Advertisement
“At the bottom of it, they will say that they’ve reached out to Buckingham Palace for comment. But the whole story is Buckingham Palace commenting,” he told Cooper. “So when we’re being told for the last six years, ‘We can’t put a statement out to protect you’ – but you do it for other members of the family. There becomes a point when silence is betrayal.”
14. He has no plans to return as a full-time member of the royal family
The Duke of Sussex also gave a firm “no” when Cooper asked in a separate clip if he would ever return as a full-time member of the royal family.
15. Harry admits he has not spoken to Camilla, Charles or William recently
Harry said that he and Camilla “haven’t spoken for a long time”.
Asked if he was texting William, Harry replied: “Currently, no. But I look forward to – I look forward to us being able to find peace.”
“How long has it been since you spoke?” Cooper said.
“A while,” the Duke of Sussex answered.
He gave a similar answer when asked about communication with his father. “We aren’t – we haven’t spoken for quite a while. Um, no, not recently.”
16. He gave a confusing depiction of his relationship with Camilla
Talking about her supposed closeness with the media, he said: “She was the villain. She was the third person in their marriage. She needed to rehabilitate her image.
Advertisement
“That made her dangerous because of the connections she was forging within the British press. And there was open willingness on both sides to trade information.”
However, he also said: “I love every member of my family, despite the differences. So, when I see her, we’re perfectly pleasant with each other,” he said with a smile. “She’s my stepmother. I don’t look at her as an evil stepmother.”
“I see someone who has married into this institution and done everything that she can to improve her reputation and her own image, for her own sake,” he continued.
17. Harry says he and Meghan will apologise for any wrongdoing
When Cooper asked if the “rupture” between Harry and Meghan and the rest of the royal family could be healed, the Duke answered “absolutely”.
“The ball is very much in their court,” he explained. “Meghan and I have continued to say that we will openly apologise for anything that we did wrong, but every time we ask that question, no one’s telling us the specifics or anything. There needs to be a constructive conversation, one that can happen in private that doesn’t get leaked.”
Advertisement
18. The Duke dismissed the idea of giving up royal titles
“Why not renounce your titles as Duke and Duchess?” Cooper also asked Harry directly.
“And what difference would that make?” Harry retorted.
19. Harry was not invited to share the plane which took royals to see Queen before her death
Harry arrived several hours after his relatives in Scotland, where the Queen died, despite also being in the south of England when his family left to see the dying matriarch.
He claimed: “I asked my brother – I said, ‘What are your plans? How are you and Kate getting up there?’ And then, a couple of hours later, you know, all of the family members that live within the Windsor and Ascot area were jumping on a plane together, a plane with 12, 14, maybe 16 seats.
“I was not invited.”
Prince Harry: In His Own Words with Michael Strahan, ABC
Released: January 9
20. Queen was not angry about him leaving royal life
The Queen never told Harry she was angry about him changing role, according to the royal.
He said he thought she was “sad” about it, but “it was never a surprise to anybody, least of all to her”.
“She knew what was going on. She knew how hard it was. She never said to me that she was angry. I think she was sad that it got to that point.”
Advertisement
21. Diana would be ‘heartbroken’ if she knew about the brothers’ rift
“I think she would be heartbroken about the fact that William, his office were part of these [negative] stories,” he said. “I think she’d be looking at it long-term to know that there are certain things that we need to go through to be able to heal the relationship.”
22. Harry admitted partial responsibility to relationship breakdown with William
Strahan asked if Harry had any responsibility for the breakdown of the relationship with his brother. The Duke of Sussex replied: “Without question, I’m sure.”
“But what people don’t know is the efforts I’ve gone to to resolve this privately,” he continued. “Both with my brother and with my father.”
23. Harry refutes the idea that the book would make rift worse
“I thought about it long and hard, and as far as I see it the divide couldn’t be greater before this book.”
23. Harry’s not ‘angry any more’
The royal said: “I am exactly where I am supposed to be.” But he admitted that not reconciling with his family would be “very sad”.
Advertisement
If that were the case, Harry said, he would focus on his life and family in California.
24. Sussexes would support the Commonwealth
Harry ruled out the possibility of returning to the UK as a working royal, explaining: “Even if there was an agreement or an arrangement between me and my family, there is that third party that is going to do everything they can to make sure that that isn’t possible.”
That was presumably an allusion to the UK press.
He added: “If there was something in the future where we can continue to support the Commonwealth, then that’s of course on the table.”
He also revealed that he made a “hybrid” proposal for Sussexes to split time between Canada and UK but there was no compromise. He said this was “really sad because I still to this day believe that this was entirely possible”.
25. Harry said he was speaking out to help protect other royal children
He said his role in the line of succession was “used against me for a long part of my life”, and that he worries about other “young kids” still in the institution.
“There are some people, especially in the UK, who have been led to believe that because you are a member of the royal family, somehow everyone owns you or has a stake in you,” he said.
Advertisement
“And that’s a message that has been purely pushed out by the British tabloids, and it creates real problems within that family and that relationship.”
Harry added: “Of course, there has to be some sort of relationship, but where it’s got too now is incredibly unhealthy.”
He said he hoped he could help future generations. “I also worry about other young kids within that family if this continues,” he said.
26. Harry refuted claims he sees Camilla as ‘evil stepmother’
He said: “I love every member of my family… so when I see her we’re perfectly pleasant with each other.
“She’s my stepmother. I don’t see her as an evil stepmother, I think she’s someone who married into this institution and done everything she can to improve her own reputation, her own image, for her own sake.”
Advertisement
27. Harry rejected hypocrisy claims
Strahan pointed out: “There are going to be people who say ‘Why don’t they either be in or get out, because if you get out there’s no hypocrisy’.”
Harry said: “I can’t ever get out and I’m incredibly aware of my position.
“I’m incredibly grateful for the life that I’ve had and continue to live.
“But there’s no version of me being ever able to get out of this. I was stunned that my family would allow security to be taken away, especially at the most vulnerable point for us.”
He added that writing the book was his only way to protect his family by correcting mistruths: “I fully accept that writing a book is feeding the beast anyway.”
28. Harry ‘genuinely’ believes in the monarchy still
But, he called for it to be reformed and modernised, saying: “I think the same process that I went through regarding my own unconscious bias would be hugely beneficial to them.
“It’s not racism, but unconscious bias if not confronted, if not acknowledged, if not learned and grown from, that can then move into racism.”
Advertisement
People magazine cover
Released: January 10
29. Diana is his ‘guardian angel’
“I struggled for years to accept or even speak about my mother’s death. I was unable to process that she was gone. I’m not sure anyone can ever truly have closure when they lose a parent, or anyone for that matter, especially when that grief may be the only thing left of them,” he told People.
“The healing process has allowed me to get to a place where I now feel the presence of my mum more than ever before. She’s with me all the time – my guardian angel.”
30. He wants his kids to have a relationship with the royals
“I’ve said before that I’ve wanted a family, not an institution – so of course, I would love nothing more than for our children to have relationships with members of my family, and they do with some, which brings me great joy,” he said.
The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, CBS
Released: January 10
Advertisement
31. Prince Harry blasts ‘dangerous lie’ he ‘boasted’ about Taliban killings
Harry slammed reports that he “somehow boasted about the number of people that I killed in Afghanistan” and called it “the most dangerous lie”.
“If I heard anyone boasting about that kind of thing, I would be angry. But it’s a lie. And hopefully now that the book is out, people will be able to see the context. It’s really troubling and very disturbing that they can get away with it. They had the context. It wasn’t like, ‘Here’s just one line.’”
Harry told Colbert that “the reason why I decided to share this in my book” was to “reduce the number of suicides” in the soldier and veteran communities.
Harry claimed this was a dangerous lie because it makes you “an increased target”, alleging this was a “choice” the media made.
32. Harry ‘fact-checks’ The Crown
The royal confirmed that he watched both “the older stuff and the more recent stuff” aired on the dramatised Netflix series.
Advertisement
Asked if he did any fact-checking, he said: “Yes, I do, actually. Which, by the way, is another reason why it’s so important that history has it right.”
33. Harry believes royals are trying to ‘undermine’ his book
Colbert asked Harry if he believed there was an “active campaign by the rest of your family, by the royal house…to undermine this book”.
The royal replied: “Of course, mainly by the British press.”
Colbert pushed the question again, this time adding if the UK media was “aided and abetted by the Palace”.
He said: “Yes, again, of course. This is the other side of the story, right?
“After 38 years, they have told their side of the story. This is the other side of the story, and there’s a lot in there that, perhaps, makes people feel uncomfortable and scared.”
34. If Diana were still alive, he and William would be in a different place
Harry claimed that if his mother were still alive, his relationship with his brother would be different.
Advertisement
He said: “It’s impossible to say where we would be now, where those relationships would be now, but there is no way that the distance between my brother and I would be the same.”
The Queen Consort’s new cypher has been revealed. And if you’re wondering what that means, it’s a monogram used to show Camilla’s official position.
The cypher will be used by the Queen Consort on personal letterheads, cards and gifts, as well as on the cross that she’ll lay at the Field of Remembrance on Thursday November 10.
Advertisement
The design incorporates the Queen Consort’s initial, ‘C’ for Camilla, and ‘R’ for Regina, – Latin for Queen. It sits alongside a representation of the Crown.
The cypher was selected personally by Camilla from a series of designs and will now become her personal property.
The cypher was designed by Professor Ewan Clayton, a calligrapher on the Faculty and Academic Board of The Royal Drawing School, in collaboration with Timothy Noad, Herald Painter and Scrivener at The College of Arms.
Advertisement
Though you’ll catch the odd glimpse of the Queen Consort’s cypher, you’ll see the King’s official symbol far more frequently.
King Charles unveiled his chosen design in September and like Camilla’s, it includes the C for his first name and the letter R for Rex, the Latin name for King.
In between these two letters is the Roman numeral for three (III) indicating that he is the third monarch in British history to be known as Charles, so it reads Charles Rex III.
Charles’ cypher will appear on government buildings, traditional police helmets, state documents and any post boxes built after his reign began.
Advertisement
It’s a slow process to make these changes, however, so you’re unlikely to see much of the two new cyphers ahead of Charles’ official coronation in May.
For now, you’ll continue to see the cypher of the late Queen Elizabeth II in many places across the country.
King Charles III has just unveiled his new royal cypher – another, albeit smaller, indication that his reign has officially begun.
The sign, revealed shortly before the official royal mourning period for the Queen ends on Tuesday, includes the C for his first name and the letter R for Rex, the Latin name for King.
Advertisement
In between these two letters is the Roman numeral for three (III) indicating that he is the third monarch in British history to be known as Charles, so it reads Charles Rex III.
The monogram is Charles’ personal property but will appear on government buildings, traditional police helmets, state documents and any post boxes built after his reign began.
It is also used on government departments and the Royal Household for franking mail, although the decision to update the cypher from the Queen’s to the King’s will be at the discretion of individual organisations.
Advertisement
The monogram is not too dissimilar to the one used by his predecessor, his mother Queen Elizabeth II. As the Latin word for Queen is Regina, and she was the second English monarch to use the name Elizabeth, her monogram was ER II (sometimes known E II R).
However, when her cypher was used in Scotland, the II was not used because Scotland never recognised Elizabeth I as their monarch, only Mary Queen of Scots.
And, while kings tend to use the more rounded Tudor crown, queens typically use the St Edward’s crown on their cyphers, as seen below.
The King chose his own design after the College of Arms presented him with a series of options. The Scottish version includes the Scottish Crown and was approved by Lord Lyon King of Arms.
Advertisement
The heralds who make up the College are members of the Royal Household.
The cypher could only be shared once Charles confirmed he wanted to reign under his first name, rather than any of his middle names – Philip, Arthur or George.
Don’t expect any huge changes overnight though, as it is traditionally a slow process to alter such symbols on a nationwide basis. The Queen did not experience many of the physical changes until more than a year after her accession to the throne, around 1953.
And, like his mother’s, the King’s coronation is also expected to be a little while off out of respect for his deceased predecessor. There’s speculation that the sovereign will try to have a more toned-down affair as well, in line with his plans for a slimmed down monarchy and amid a worsening cost of living crisis.
Currency, too, will gradually be updated to include Charles’ profile rather than his mother’s, although the new ones will show the King facing to the left. This is a continuation of a 17th Century tradition, which saw successive monarch facing alternative ways.
Advertisement
New stamps, sculptures and portraits, are in the work as well, although they will all need approval from the King himself.
Still, the cypher shows that the new Caroline era is upon us, a name which stems from the Latin equivalent for Charles, Carolus.
This announcement also comes after the Palace released an image of the black ledger stone with the Queen’s name, birth and death dates etched onto it in St George’s Chapel, to mark the late monarch’s final resting place.
She shares the stone with her parents, King George VI and Queen Elizabeth, along with her husband, Prince Philip.
The end of Queen Elizabeth II’s reign does not just mean a changeover for the UK’s head of state.
The Queen’s face or name have been put on many British (and overseas) items over the many decades of her reign, from state-owned objects – like currency – to brands you might not have realised, like Twinings, and Heinz.
Over 800 brands have lost their right to use the royal coat of arms on their packaging, and they now have to prove the royal family use their products before they can put it back.
Advertisement
Here’s what you need to know.
What is the royal warrant?
This is when the royal coat of arms – with the English lion on the left and the Scottish unicorn on the right of a shield, featuring different UK emblems on it – can be printed on a product’s packaging. And it doesn’t cost the brand a thing.
There is usually a statement underneath explaining which royal appointed the warrant, too. Most products previously had: “By Appointment to Her Majesty the Queen.”
The monarch can decide who is to be a “grantor” (aside from themselves), meaning the person who officially decides what products can receive the royal warrant.
Officially known as a Royal Warrant of Appointment, it allows brands to use the coat of arms if they supply goods or services to the royals “on a regular and ongoing basis to the Royal Households of Grantor/s for not less than five years of the past seven”.
Advertisement
Brands also have to prove they have policies and plans in place which show they prioritise sustainability and the environment.
Companies which sell items to souvenirs shops in various royal estate do not qualify.
Which brands use it?
Among the hundreds of brands, both British and international, which hold the royal warrant, here are just a handful of household names which received the official royal seal of approval:
Bacardi-Martini
Cadbury UK Ltd
Carluccio’s
Kellogg’s
Boots Opticians
Molten Brown
Penhaligon’s
How long can brands use it?
Warrants are granted for up to five years at a time, but can be reviewed for renewed the year before it runs out.
These warrants will now be reviewed and granted by the Queen’s successor, King Charles III – although it’s worth noting that he actually approved many of the previous royal warrant holders anyway.
An estimated 875 brands have the royal coat of arms on their packaging – but now the Queen has died, it no longer means anything, according to the Royal Warrant Holders Association.
Advertisement
But, the brands are allowed to use the symbol for an additional two years as they adapt to life under the new monarch, as long as there is not a significant change within the company concerned.
Between 20 and 40 new warrants are granted and old ones cancelled each year – even if it’s cancelled, they can have a year to alter packaging.
How can the warrant be cancelled?
There are a lot of different reasons – if the quality of the product is not “up to standard” anymore, it’s “no longer manufactured or available”, order numbers have fallen or the goods or services are no longer required, the royal warrant could be withdrawn.
If a company goes under, it loses the royal seal of approval too.
Will anything else need to be changed now we have a new monarch?
Yes – the most obvious thing being the UK currency. The Queen’s face is on all of British coins and bank notes right now.
Advertisement
The Bank of England says it costs around 7p or 8p to make a banknote, and there are around 4.7 billion in use in the UK at the moment – meaning it could turn out to be pretty expensive to replace them all.
But, like with the royal warrant, this change is not usually quick.
For instance, the Queen’s face did not begin to appear on coins until the year after her accession (1953), and she was not on banknotes for years – although that was because she was the first monarch to appear on such currency.
King George VI’s face was also only removed from coins 20 years after his death, during the change to the decimal system.
Unused stamps will stay valid for use until at least the end of next year.
Postboxes always carry the insignia of the monarch reigning at the time it was put up – E (Elizabeth II) and R (for Regina). New boxes now may use the cypher CR – Charles Rex III. But the ones currently in place will not be changed.
Advertisement
Royal Mail has not revealed how much it would cost to do this anyway.
And, the organisation told DW that “in line with the King’s wishes we will minimise any waste and avoidable cost, so we will be using up stocks of postage stamps and not removing the late Queen’s cypher from vehicles and post boxes ”.
What else might need to be changed?
Many of our emergency services will need to be updated at some point, from the fire service ensign, to military medals with the Queen’s effigy, police helmets, and UK passports.
Some Commonwealth currency bears the Queen’s face, too.
Her image is on the currency of at least 33 countries, more than any other living monarch, including Canada, Jamaica, New Zealand, as she was head of the Commonwealth.
King Charles III has been in the spotlight for his entire life – but is he due a rebrand now he’s head of state?
Until September 8, Charles was the world’s longest serving heir, having been the first-in-line to the throne since 1952. That’s 70 years – his mother was crowned when he was just three years old.
Advertisement
However, during that time the royal has had a rather tumultuous relationship with the public. Perhaps, as he transitions into his new role as sovereign, Charles is looking to rejuvenate his image too.
But, why would he need a rebrand?
The King has faced a great deal of scrutiny over the years, and his public persona has not always emerged intact.
In 1994, he indirectly insulted his own parents by telling interviewer Jonathan Dimbleby they were not supportive throughout his childhood, prompting pundits to speculate about a royal rift – and that Charles had overshared.
During this same period, Charles’ reputation was on the line due to his declining relationship with his first wife, Princess Diana.
Advertisement
Not only was she seen as the “People’s Princess” and more popular than him, their tense separation in 1992 and her subsequent death in a car crash in 1997, led to an outpouring of grief – and many people turning against the royals in rebellion.
Charles’ affair with his current wife, the Queen consort, then known as Camilla Parker-Bowles, through part of his marriage to Diana was highly publicised. Camilla was also married during their affair, pushing more of the public to side with Diana, then Princess of Wales.
While Charles and Camilla have been happily married since 2005, the popular Netflix series The Crown has been raking up the entire history of the Queen’s reign for the past few years, with a fair amount of artistic license, too.
This has caused renewed anger among younger generations who may not have experienced the tension between Charles and his parents, and his ex-wife, the first time around.
Further questions over the future of the royal family under Charles’ hand emerged when his second son Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle announced they would be leaving ‘The Firm’. The Sussexes have since indicated a rift still exists between them and the new King.
Advertisement
Charles, too, has been criticised for “meddling” in politics and supposedly lobbying politicians after his “black spider memos” were revealed by the Guardian in 2015. This was particularly worrying for many Palace staff, because Charles is part of the constitutional monarchy – he is meant to be apolitical.
Has he already started the rebrand?
Yes. It seems that just days into his reign, Charles was already trying to shake off some of the more “stuffy” imagery, and stiff upper lip attitude often associated with the crown as he ushers in his own reign at King.
As soon as he returned to London after being by the Queen’s side during her death, he jumped out of the car and started greeting the crowds outside Buckingham Palace.
During the unscheduled walkabout, he shook hands with well-wishers and was even kissed on the cheek by one member of the public.
Advertisement
He referred to his mother as “Darling Mama” in his first official address to the nation on Friday, in an unexpected emotional turn, and he has since said: “I was very lucky to have her as my mother.”
He also explained he was passing the Queen Consort title on to Camilla because of her loyal service to the country over the last 17 years, tacitly acknowledging their complicated past.
He indicated the Duchess of Cambridge would become the Princess of Wales – a title not used in public since Diana was alive – and extended his love to Harry and Meghan in his speech, in a bid to provide the sense of a more united monarchy.
It’s worth noting that in the same speech, Charles indicated that it was time for “change”, and suggested he is going to be leaving all his passion projects behind as he adapts to life as sovereign.
“My life will of course change as I take up my new responsibilities,” he said on Saturday. “It will no longer be possible for me to give so much of my time and energies to the charities and issues for which I care so deeply. But I know this important work will go on in the trusted hands of others.”
Advertisement
Is it working?
Well, to an extent. A YouGov poll published on Tuesday shows people already have more faith in him than before he inherited the throne.
In May, it was a pretty even split between those who thought he would do a bad job and those who thought he would do a good job as monarch, at around 30% on either side.
In fact, ever since July 2019, approximately 30% of respondents did not believe in the monarch’s future on the throne – up until now.
New polling has found 63% of respondents believe Charles will make a good King.
But, as ever, the support is not unanimous.
Those on social media have been more critical, with two separate clips showing Charles losing his temper over pens in the last few days going viral.
Advertisement
When visiting Hillsborough in Northern Ireland on Tuesday, the King signed the estates’ visitors’ book and became infuriated when he found his pen was leaking.
He was caught on camera saying: “I can’t bear this bloody thing!”
A similar incident unfolded during the Accession Council on Saturday, when he was seen shooing staff to clear his desk while he signed his proclamation.
It’s probably too early to tell, but it’s certainly going to be an uphill battle to earn the same reputation his mother had.
As YouGov noted at the Platinum Jubilee celebrations, the Queen has maintained a positive view with around 70% of the population for at least the last decade.
“I can’t bear this bloody thing!”: King Charles’ signing ceremony at Northern Ireland’s Hillsborough Castle made one thing clear – even royalty can’t escape the frustration of an inadequate pen. pic.twitter.com/nzygNTLslX
What makes it likely that he will get a rebrand anyway? Well, royals have done it before. Quite often, in fact.
Camilla’s is probably the most remarkable. As Charles’ first love, she was deeply unpopular for her affair with Charles throughout his first marriage and the scandalous rumours that leaked about their relationship certainly did not help.
After Diana’s death, Charles even tried to keep his relationship with Camilla out of the public eye, to avoid further scrutiny.
Even when they wed, she chose not to take the title Princess of Wales, despite it technically being her moniker as the official wife to the Prince of Wales from 2005 onwards.
However, over the years she had reshaped her image completely. This became clear when the Queen confirmed that it was her “sincere wish” for Camilla to take the much-disputed title of Queen consort earlier this year – a step away from tradition, considering both Charles and Camilla have been divorced.
Advertisement
It was also a title that many still associated with Diana.
The Queen also rebranded throughout her reign. When she first became monarch after her father’s abrupt death in 1952, she suddenly had to prove herself, not only as the first female monarch since Queen Victoria, but as a 25-year-old sovereign.
Famously, she reinvented herself again after Diana’s death – even if some felt her hand was forced. The occasion saw a huge slump in the royal’s popularity, with the public looking unfavourably on the Queen for not welcoming the princess wholeheartedly (in their eyes) into the royal fold.
Since then, she has became the Queen’s “grandmother” instead, appearing much warmer in her public appearances and being seen as a reassuring face during times of crisis – especially during the Covid pandemic.
Princess Diana, too, changed her image from a shy teenager when she first met Charles, to the most fashionable member of the royal family, and keen humanitarian.
Advertisement
After her divorce, she adopted another new persona, taking more fashion risks than she could have as a working royal and standing up for more controversial causes such as joining the campaign to eradicate all landmines in Angola.