The news that Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie will not be attending the royal family’s Easter service at St George’s chapel in Windsor might initially strike the uninitiated as insignificant. After all, every family has their own commitments over Easter, and given that both the princesses have young families of their own, they might be forgiven for choosing to prioritise lower-key private events over a get-together of the royal clan.
Yet there are two things that make this noteworthy. The first is that it has been (subtly) briefed that the princesses have not been made welcome this year, with the telling statement that they have made ‘alternative plans’ for Easter. And the second – and more seismic – is the continued debate as to whether Beatrice and Eugenie are backseat passengers in the reputational car crash that has engulfed, and destroyed, both of their parents.
The Firm is notable for its ruthlessness under pressure
Beatrice and Eugenie are – let’s be honest about this – royal versions of the nepo baby. While neither are working royals, both have jobs that were seemingly given to them because of their titles and supposed connections: Beatrice is a vice president of strategic partnerships at a software company and Eugenie is a director at the art company Hauser + Wirth. Neither job could be described as wildly taxing. Both allowed, hitherto, plenty of time for the princesses to be photographed attending apparently endless society functions, dressed up to the nines. Often they were also accompanied by their mother, the former Duchess of York: a woman who would have attended the opening of an (Asprey) envelope in her pre-disgrace days, especially if said envelope contained a large cheque as a thank you for her presence.
Well, those days are well and truly gone. As Fergie weighs up her limited options – which seem to be Middle Eastern exile courtesy of a friendly potentate or a tell-all book and heart-on-sleeve interview, probably on US television – her daughters are facing the prospect of banishment from the royal family. It should be noted that, initially at least, King Charles was keen to demonstrate unity, with the princesses both being invited to Sandringham at Christmas.
But matters have moved on considerably since then, not least because of their father Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s arrest in January. Questions have also since been asked as to the extent to which the princesses were aware of the family’s benefactor Jeffrey Epstein’s activities and whether they themselves benefitted from his largesse in anything other than a social way. After all, many others did.
It was no coincidence that Eugenie stepped down as patron of the charity Anti-Slavery International earlier this month – possibly with her hand forced – given the endless unsavoury stories about Epstein’s trafficking underage women. It was presumably once considered a coup to have the princess associated with the organisation – she served there for seven years – but now the toxicity that her parents have brought to the royal family has infected their children as well.
There will be those who defend Eugenie and Beatrice as innocent bystanders who should not be punished for Andrew and Sarah Ferguson’s activities. There will also be those who will be waiting to see precisely how the dust settles when the full revelation of the York family’s involvement with Epstein comes to light.
It may be that the princesses’ lack of appearance at Easter this year really is innocuous and that they will be seen with their aunt, uncles and cousins at other high-profile events in due course. Yet this seems unlikely. The Firm is notable for its ruthlessness under pressure – hence Andrew’s banishment and stripping of titles – and if there is any suggestion that Beatrice and Eugenie will cause any embarrassment then they, too, can expect an indefinite spell in reputational Siberia. The sins of the father – and mother – will in that case most definitely have been visited upon the daughters.
Comments