Alexander Larman

For future royal historians, the date 19 February may take on the same totemic significance as the abdication of Edward VIII on 10 December. It was the date that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, eighth in line to the throne, was arrested on the day of his 66th birthday – it is fair to surmise this wasn’t a coincidence – and taken to Aylsham police station. Before yesterday, Aylsham was an unexceptional North Norfolk market town, perhaps best known for the presence of a firm of fine art auctioneers. Now, it will forever go down in history as the place where the former Duke of York was taken, put in the cells, and interrogated.

Ever since the Restoration of Charles II in 1660, no member of the Royal Family has been arrested. Which makes this morning’s news that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor has been taken into police custody under suspicion of misconduct in public office all the more seismic. And with a certain grim irony, his arrest comes on his 66th birthday, of all days. This arrest represents not so much the beginning of the end as the point at which the Rubicon has been crossed, forever This development had seemed inevitable for a considerable amount of time now. Remarks from both Buckingham Palace and Sir Keir Starmer in the past few days seemed to indicate that both the King and the Prime Minister expected that the once-unthinkable would happen sooner rather than later.

The news that the Scottish beer company BrewDog has put itself up for sale has been greeted with a mixture of sorrow and shrugs by drinks commentators and enthusiasts. Those who have been stalwart fans of BrewDog – an organisation that always valued PR stunts as much as it did brewing –will mourn its diminished presence in our high streets and pubs, as well as the potential end of beers like Punk IPA and Elvis Juice. While those who viewed the company as a triumph of style over substance may now feel vindicated by their belief that the craft beer renaissance in Britain was always driven as much by hype as good drinks.

The death of the actor Robert Duvall at the age of 95 – almost exactly a year after that of his friend Gene Hackman – brings to the end another chapter of Old Hollywood. But unlike Hackman, who combined on-screen brilliance with a combustible, confrontational personality, Duvall was a thoroughly professional and popular figure who was a delight to work with, by all accounts.

The sheer weight of allegations against Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor – all tawdry, all sordid – runs the risk of creating not so much outrage as weariness. It was clear months ago that the former Duke of York appeared to have been behaving in a way that brought shame not just on his family but on his country. Yet as the stories from the Epstein files continue to weave their insidious way into the public consciousness, the effrontery with which Andrew behaved seems quite unparalleled in any kind of recent history. Well, perhaps if we exclude the antics of Lord Mandelson, that is.  What is of most interest, at this demeaning point, is to examine the complex psychological relationship that appears to have existed between Epstein and Andrew.

There has been much hand-wringing and drama about what the royal family should be doing – and criticism of what they are doing – about the former Duke and Duchess of York and their respective relationships with Jeffrey Epstein. But amidst all this, two of the most significant voices in the Firm have been conspicuously silent. The Prince and Princess of Wales, especially William, were thought to be instrumental in last year’s decision to strip Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor of his royal titles and to exile him from Royal Lodge. Nevertheless, the most recent moves to hasten his banishment to the Sandringham estate were believed to have come entirely from the King, rather than from his son and daughter-in-law.

The news that the disgraced former Duke of York has been turfed out of his home of Royal Lodge in the middle of the night and rusticated to a rather less grand property somewhere on the Sandringham Estate will not, perhaps, be greeted with particular sorrow by many. Ever since the latest and highly embarrassing round of revelations concerning Andrew’s scandalous association with Jeffrey Epstein, it was inevitable that the royals would have to act ruthlessly and swiftly in order to get ahead of the situation. In truth, King Charles had fewer options available than he might have liked.