It all began with a single photograph, arguably the most impactful ever snapped of a member of the monarchy.
There stood the Duke of York, with his arm around a young woman, while another individual grinned conspiratorially in the rear.
Without that photograph, captured at a party in 2001, who would have believed the assertions of a teenager who said she was moved across the Atlantic and forced to have perfunctory intimate contact with a member of the monarchy?
A curious, revealing gesture by someone who had overtly asserted to have not known about her, asserted he could not have had intimate contact with her, and yet paid a substantial sum of his mother's funds to avert a drawn-out lawsuit.
In this context, discussions of the royals acting firmly to cut Andrew off are wide of the mark. This controversy has continued for the largest portion of 15 years since that photograph, and another image of Andrew walking congenially with a disgraced financier emerged.
Travel were listed in royal annual reports: chopper transfers from the palace to a golf course and back again in time for midday meal, exclusive air travel instead of commercial flights, all for the benefit of "the frequent flyer".
Additionally the entitlement which required respect when he walked into a area or the supreme consciousness about his royal titles used on his letterheads in letters to his associates.
He avoided accountability while his parent, who strangely pampered him, was still alive. The Queen did at least strip him of official roles and honorary colonelcies in the consequence of his ill-fated and, as revealed, untruthful television interview six years ago.
It was only in the last 14 days that events accelerated, following the publication of biographical works giving more disturbing particulars of his actions and that of his companions.
Further disclosures have again highlighted Andrew's assumption that he could get away with being untruthful about his relationship with a convicted criminal.
The public (and the media) were far ahead of the royals. There was nobody of any importance to speak up for him, a result of all those years of presumption.
The more intelligent royals recognized that. The one imperative is to pass on the monarchy, if not as previously at least whole and unstained.
They have spent the last 190 years trying to undo the legacy of past sovereigns, showing they are beneficial, responsible and responsive to their people.
Andrew was putting all that in danger in an age when submission and secrecy is no longer adequate.
Finally, the famously indecisive king was pressured more. There was no other option. The palace had relinquished authority of the narrative.
Now it is the loss of honorifics and the ongoing and permanent personal shame that will hurt Andrew most deeply.
He remains a royal advisor, on paper able to act for the monarch, and he is still in the lineage to the crown, but none of these will truly come to pass.
Do individuals he encounters still acknowledge him? Might they still slip up and call him Sir? Will they even say Sir,
Of course, he is not moving to suburbia, but to the sovereign's vast grounds at a royal residence.
In that place, he will be supplied by the sovereign with one of the estate properties and given some form of personal stipend.
This differs from his prior accommodation, where he paid a nominal rent for more than 20 years, and the county is a bit remote, but even so it may not be far enough.
This is not over. There are still files in the hands of overseas authorities to be made public.
Perhaps for the moment the harm to the monarchy to the monarchy is limited. The statement from the palace was evidently that the revocation of honorifics was what the monarch, and notably other senior royals, desired.
No more deception that Andrew was doing it voluntarily. And, notably, the short communication showed evidently that the institution were supporting the victim's narrative of events.
Furthermore, for the initial instance they eventually showed regard for the victims: "The censures are judged required, notwithstanding the reality that he maintains his innocence of the allegations against him."
Finally it is presumption, selfishness and laziness that will destroy the institution. In his foolishness, self-indulgence and corruption, Andrew appears never to have grasped that lesson.
Elara is a digital artist and designer passionate about blending technology with creativity to inspire others.