Controversial Throne

Aerial view of the Buckingham Palace, located in Belgravia district at the heart of London, is the focal point of the British monarchy and the official residence of the British Queen. 

Almost 18 years since Sarah Ferguson, the former wife of Prince Andrew, the Duke of York (second son of the Queen), was photographed topless in Cote de Azur, south of France, another wife of a senior male member of the British monarchy is embroiled with the same scandal.

Two weeks after Buckingham Palace bitterly fought for the injunction of the nude photos of Prince Harry in Britain, the officials are back on the same job again - defending a royal family member against malicious media attack related to nude photos.

Catherine, the Duchess of Cambridge made headlines when she was snapped sunbathing topless in a French villa owned by the Queen's nephew, Viscount Linley. The villa is located in the secluded area in the south of France but the road is accessible to travelers. The villa, which perched above the hill, can be viewed through a high powered camera.

And this is where the trouble started.

The Duchess of Cambridge failed to consider the fact that we are now living in the high tech world that even the sounds of breathing can be intercepted.

Was it lack of judgment or she was simply careless and untutored with royalty's unspoken rule--to be cautious and vigilant all the time.

Most of her supporters defended her emphasizing the invasion of privacy stuff, reacting that if there was more graphic, it was Prince Harry. But Harry is a male and he would never become a Queen of England. Catherine should be more discreet because of the image she would portray someday.

The embarrassing topless photos (one shot Kate had her underwear pulled half exposing her bum) of Kate Middleton that made headlines through out the world something Diana never did in her entire life as royalty. 

The issue here is not so much about invading privacy but more on how to be discreet and cautious with action especially if you are famous. 

Is this how modern day royals behave? (Read more HERE)

But amidst the hoopla of these nude, controversial photos of some members of royalty, the question now is why the world spent too much effort analyzing the scandal?Why others could not just let it pass and move on  with their lives in peace?

Well, here is the truth...

The British Monarchy is very vulnerable to controversies and scandals, this is maybe because the public is extremely fascinated with the charm and mystic it reverberates. Due to these vulnerabilities, the monarchy, not only in Britain but the whole Europe as well, is assumed to be more cautious not to commit a scandalous offense and mistake.

Every move of the royals is magnified on print and TV, every action is analyzed and debated on conversations, so the least thing royals could do is be more vigilant with their actions and conduct because they cannot control the people around them. Every misstep is  calculated even the simple removal of socks will hit headlines.

The palace is no stranger to criticism and scandals and the best defense they always do is devise a carefully planned publicity stunt machine to placate the public, especially its subjects, that the monarchy is still worthy to be praised and adored. 

The monarchy is as old as the existence of the world itself and the English throne had been part of the old world, but though visibly ancient in tradition and in sentiments, the English monarchy drew its strength and charm from its glorious past. And part of this past and medieval tradition is to guard its mystical existence not to be exposed to the “outsiders” to prevent complication, lifting its veil and embracing outsiders would surely spell disaster---that’s what historians and monarchists had been trying to emphasize through all these years. 

It’s the unspoken rule of the English monarchy --- to look fo a spouse within the royal court only, no commoners are allowed to enter the vicinity, thus Princes, in the past were admonished to marry fellow royals to protect the prestige of the crown and to keep the mystic within their circle. 

But as times evolved, preferences and lifestyle of royals also had changed, arranged royal marriages slowly died down. When the 20th century arrived, the fear of ancient Kings and Queens on mixing their bloodline with commoners became true.

Only few royals had managed to find their partners within their circle, and among the current European crown heads only three of them married into royalty, Queen Elizabeth II (Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark who became the Duke of Edinburgh after their wedding in 1947), King Juan Carlos of Spain (Princess Sophia of Greece and Denmark) and King Albert II of Belgium (Princess Paula di Calabria of Lombardy). The rest, including their heirs, married commoners

Elizabeth's heir apparent, Prince Charles, though did not catch a royal Princess, married a beautiful aristocrat with royal lineage, Lady Diana Spencer, the youngest daughter of a wealthy British nobleman, Johnny Spencer, a direct descendant of King Charles II. 

In 1936, the mystic was threatened to be exposed and the kingdom was on the verge of losing its prestige. King Edward VIII almost ushered the throne to the quicksand of illusion when he insisted to take a commoner, twice divorced, American woman as his wife, luckily for the British monarchy, everyone in the palace and in the parliament strongly disapproved with his choice and joined forces to stop his plan. 

He did marry his commoner lover, Wallis Simpson anyway but he paid a high prize for doing so, he was forced to live in exile and was ostracized from the British royal court forever. Edward VIII’s case was supposed to serve a lesson to the next generation of royalty and would have cautioned them to avoid taking a commoner spouse.

“ Love is not an option for the man who would be King of England, it is a consideration in marriage but not a guiding force” - It was a sound warning sternly given by Lord Mountbatten, the maternal uncle of Prince Philip, to Prince Charles when he attempted to date commoner women. For a time, the warning became effective. 

Now comes the 21st century. Royals began redefining their existence and slowly adopting the call of times aligning themselves to common people to be more aware with what’s happening around. They were just supposed to see the clearer picture of what’s life beyond the palace walls to understand better the plight of their depressed subjects across the continent, but this simple “immersion” went too far and they mingled with commoners too seriously, now the best guarded mystic is threatening to be exposed.

Or should I say, already exposed and no one could ever take it back.