King Charles III delivers his address to the nation and the Commonwealth from Buckingham Palace. Photo / Getty Images
OPINION:
The moment came seven minutes and 31 seconds into King Charles III's first televised address as monarch.
Sitting in the Blue Drawing Room in Buckingham Palace, a large framed photo of his mother, Her Majesty the Queen plonked prominently by his side and addressing a mourning nation, it was a speech that must have long sat waiting in a drawer for the inevitable, but no less sad moment, when the UK entered the new Carolean age. (That's the correct name for the period of the rule when a bloke named Charles is in charge.)
This was his chance to make his first real impression as sovereign; to appear before his people both as a grieving son and as a king who has waited quite literally his entire life for this moment.
The first surprising development came when Charles made his eldest son William the Prince of Wales, a title that dates back to 1301. While the kingship had passed to the 73-year-old the second his mother drew her last breath, the Wales title does not function the same way and must be bestowed by the monarch. Many had assumed that William's promotion would not come until 2023 and once Charles and his wife the Queen Consort Camilla had had their coronation.
He himself was only awarded the title at age 9 in 1958, news he reportedly learned while watching TV in his headmaster's study at Cheam School alongside his schoolmates.
But not Charles, who seemed intent on starting his reign with a certain get-it-done verve.
And the second development? How exactly he decided to include his other son Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex and his wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex in this historic moment?
Going into this, the question had been, what would he say of the self-exiled Sussexes who, for the better part of the past three years ago, have lived in California, inked whopping deals, fed their chickens and set about strafing the Palace with criticism?
The answer: In only 19 words, Charles managed to deliver a masterful line that will likely be debated and parsed for decades.
Thus, seven and a half minutes in, the new king delivered his coup de grace by saying, "I want also to express my love for Harry and Meghan as they continue to build their lives overseas".
Sure, there was Charles expressing true fatherly affection for his second son and his wife, taking the time out of his historic address to ensure the Sussexes were a part of the moment.
But was this really, as some have argued, an attempt at reconciliation?
I'm not so sure. Look closer and the way the king handled the Harry problem was the equivalent of Fred Astaire-worthy fancy footwork.
For one thing, there is the issue of the Sussexes' titles or entirely lack thereof. Throughout his speech, the other family members he spoke of were all also referenced by their new titles. Charles spoke of his "darling wife, Camilla" who now "becomes my Queen Consort" and of her "loyal public service".
Then he moved on to "my heir, William" who "assumes the Scottish titles which have meant so much to me", who "succeeds me as Duke of Cornwall" and announced, "I am proud to create him Prince of Wales, Tywysog Cymru".
Next, Kate, with him telling the audience of millions, "Our new Prince and Princess of Wales will, I know, continue to inspire and lead our national conversations, helping to bring the marginal to the centre ground where vital help can be given".
However, when it was the Sussexes' turn for their brief moments in the spotlight, he simply referred to them as "Harry and Meghan" with nary a title in sight.
What perhaps matters more here is not so much what the 42nd monarch since William the Conqueror said but what he did not. With the eyes of the world on him, what sentiment did he choose at this moment to declare? Love. Not pride or respect or any sort of reference to their work.
Sure, his words and delivery demonstrated real warmth and caring, but notably missing was any reference to them having achieved anything of note or the contribution they made during their royal tenures.
For contrast, William and Kate came in for Charles' praise, speaking of them "inspiring" and that they would "continue …[to] lead our national conversations, helping to bring the marginal to the centre ground where vital help can be given".
If anyone had hoped that the Queen's passing, news of which broke at 6.30pm London-time, would offer a moment of healing and rapprochement between the House of Windsor and Harry then there has been a sobering reality check.
Earlier that day, at 12.32pm, the Palace had put out an incredibly worrying statement saying that the Queen's doctors were "concerned" and "have recommended she remain under medical supervision" with it subsequently being reported just over an hour later that all of her children and William were racing towards Balmoral.
Harry and Meghan would be heading there too, their spokesperson said, only for that to be amended to only him making the dash north. (Kate too stayed behind.)
About 4pm, the same time that Harry was taking off from Luton in a small private jet, his brother, Prince Andrew, Prince Edward and his wife Sophie, Countess of Wessex were spotted speeding through the gates of Her Majesty's Scottish estate.
An hour and a half later, with Harry still in the air, the news that stunned the world broke. (Yes, I know she was 96 years old and had obviously been in poor health but were any of us truly prepared for this momentous turning point? Exactly.)
There is something of a sting to the fact that, despite knowing Harry was en route, the Palace went ahead with the announcement before he could join his family.
As Duncan Larcombe, the Sun's former royal editor told the Daily Beast, "I would suspect that for Harry, getting off that plane and actually seeing the announcement had already been made was a very humbling experience."
Ditto the odd travel arrangements. Harry and Meghan's home Frogmore Cottage, the Cambridges' Adelaide Cottage and Andrew's Royal Lodge all sit on the Windsor estate, and yet the duke made the trip entirely separately. Was he not offered a seat on their plane or did he choose not to fly with them? Both scenarios would point to the bad blood between William and Harry remaining especially bad indeed.
(Larcombe has raised another possibility, telling the Beast that the brothers "fly separately as a rule" however "it's not as strict a rule as it used to be, especially given George, Charlotte, and Louis have all displaced Harry in the order of succession".)
After a sombre-looking Harry arrived at Balmoral he was then the first to leave only 12 hours later, making his way back to Aberdeen airport for the flight back to London.
At a time when the royal family is pulling together, united by grief, Harry has never seemed more isolated. Photos of him making the way across the tarmac dressed in a black suit, carrying a backpack, and entirely on his own really did say everything.
What comes next for the duke and the wider royal family is a complete unknown. Will his grandmother's death mean he will shelve his forthcoming autobiography or with her having passed away, might he feel licence to decide to go after the Palace, all guns blazing, in the book?
The same holds for the couple's Netflix series and their podcasting efforts.
And for Charles, now that he is king, might he do anything and everything to heal the breach so this sad chapter can finally be closed? Or given he is in charge and with the increased responsibilities and prominence of the new Prince and Princess of Wales, will the Sussexes be pushed even further to the margins?
Charles closed out his speech quoting Hamlet, saying of his mother, may "flights of angels sing thee to thy rest". It was an incredibly touching moment but there is also a certain sad symmetry that he chose to reference a play all about a deeply unhappy prince on the outs with his family too.
• Daniela Elser is a royal expert and a writer with more than 15 years of experience working with a number of Australia's leading media titles.
"I do feel kind of stuck. And I feel like a lot of people feel that way."