Andrew, now known only as Mountbatten Windsor instead of ‘prince’, has just been reminded about ‘worse fates’ than being banished to Sandringham House.
The whole thing has happened in a piece for the Daily Mail by royal commentator Sarah Vine.
She penned this piece as a response to the loss Andrew faced, when his title of prince was rescinded by King Charles.
For those unversed, he previously relinquished his title of Duke of York of his own volition.
In the eyes of this commentator, “life at Sandringham is hardly a hardship.” Because “he'll have a roof over his head and food in his belly. And if it was good enough for Prince Philip, who lived on the estate when he retired, it will be more than satisfactory for his wayward son.”
Sure, while Ms Vine admits “it's a far cry from what he's used to, but by most people's standards he is still very, very lucky. Indeed, by the standards of most royals who have had cause to displease their relatives, he's positively blessed.”
After all, in the ages past there were Kings who we not as gentle in their approach. Namely King Henry I, he “stole Normandy off his brother and then stuck him in jail for 30 years; Edward IV had his brother George, Duke of Clarence, executed for treason; Queen Mary did the same to her cousin Lady Jane Gray; and then there was all that business with Richard III and the princes in the tower.” So “not only is Andrew's head still firmly attached to his neck, he also remains at liberty,” Ms Vine admitted.
“Both those things, if you ask me, are reasons to be grateful – and a good place to start the long climb back to respectability,” she concluded by saying too.