Why Prince Philip’s efficient running of the royal household was frowned upon

Prince Philip, as husband to Queen Elizabeth II, understood the necessity of making choices that might not always garner widespread approval, but were essential for the smooth functioning and stability of the monarchy.

Just over three years since his passing at the age of 99, royal expert Ingrid Seward has revealed that when the Queen ascended the throne in 1953, Prince Philip made some “sweeping changes” that made him very unpopular in the royal household.

Speaking to GB News Seward said the Duke of Edinburgh was forced to brush aside his naval ambitions to support the Queen.

“When the Queen’s father became really ill he was on service in Malta. He realised then that his naval days were going to be over and that he had to do what he was destined to do, which was support his wife, the Queen, as monarch,” she explained.

The GB News host quizzed Seward on how the Duke’s military career might have affected how he gave and took orders in Buckingham Palace.

“Well, Philip started to make the orders because he saw that the household was run in a very inefficient way,” Seward said.

“He was an extremely efficient man, he wanted things to run smoothly. He became a little bit unpopular because he started making quite sweeping changes within the royal household to make it more efficient and that wasn’t always popular with the established members of the staff that were there.

“Philip always said my duty is to support my wife as monarch. And that’s the position he never wavered from.

“Whatever else he did, he was always supporting his wife, the Queen.

“I think that really big sense of duty was what held them both together over the years.

“Apart from the other obvious things like his sense of humour, his loyalty and his ability just to get on with life and make things happen.

“I suppose he was a bit of a house husband, although he would loathe that expression.”

Given his traditional principles and penchant for order and discipline, there’s been much speculation over how the patriarch would have responded to things as they are between the California Sussex’s and the rest of the royal family. 

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s recent antics have strained royal relations and its is believed Prince Philip, Harry’s grandfather, would have strongly disapproved of the couple’s recent decision to change their children’s surname from Mountbatten-Windsor to Sussex.

Seward at the time commented that the Duke would turn in his grave over such a move especially since he’d advocated so vehemently to have his own surname, Mountbatten, retained within royal ranks.

“How sad, therefore, that only three generations later, Harry should so blatantly disregard his grandfather’s wishes and effectively abandon the family name for which Philip had fought,” Seward said.

“Harry professed to respect and love the Duke of Edinburgh and I am sure he did and always will, but this latest debacle would make Philip turn in his grave.

“Do Harry and Meghan think they’re being clever? Maybe this is an attempt to entrench the Sussex name so firmly that, whatever the political atmosphere in Great Britain, the title could never be effectively removed.

“Perhaps they’re just badly advised.”

Keeping with names, Prince Philip reportedly nicknamed Meghan Markle “DoW” due to her perceived similarities to Wallis Simpson, the Duchess of Windsor, who famously influenced King Edward VIII to abdicate the throne for love.

Having observed the turmoil caused by historic romantic entanglements within the Royal Family, Prince Philip approached the situation with Harry and Meghan with caution despite Queen Elizabeth’s initial optimism about Markle’s whirlwind romance with her grandson.

However, the Queen’s approval allegedly soon soured after the couple named their daughter, Lilibet, the Queen’s nickname, without her consent. 

To this day it remains unclear whether the Sussex’s had the Queen’s blessing when it came to the naming of their daughter.