As he peers into his illuminated shaving mirror this morning, King Charles will see a face that has noticeably changed in the past 12 months.

While the reflection may show furrows that are a touch deeper and ruddy cheeks a little more weather-beaten, a sparkle behind his eyes tells a different story.

For a monarch who as a young man was prone to introspection, the temptation surely will be to do some crystal ball-gazing and wonder what kind of year 2026 will be for him and the royals.

Above all, he must be asking, can it be any worse than 2025?

There were times in the last tumultuous 12 months when the Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor drama threatened to obliterate not just all the good works of the Royal Family but also the long-term security of the House of Windsor and its grip on the nation’s affections.

Questions about the ex-prince’s occupation of Royal Lodge – soon to be his former home – has galvanised a Labour Party desperate to shift attention away from its own Government’s lamentable failures, with calls for a wider examination of royal properties and their – allegedly – generous leasing arrangements.

Prince Edward’s possession on preferential terms of vast Bagshot Park could yet become as awkward an issue this year as Andrew’s and Royal Lodge was last year.

Though, as we shall see, an imaginative solution may prevent a repeat of the widespread public outcry which dogged the former Duke of York’s refusal to give up the 30-room mansion that was once home to the Queen Mother.

However, amid such a climate it would not take much for Left-wing MPs, sniffing an opportunity – and royal blood – to demand a wider audit of the wealth of the Windsors.

The former Lib Dem minister Norman Baker has urged the Labour-dominated Public Accounts Committee to undertake a review of all royal finances, including the duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster which supply the King and Prince William with much of their private riches.

Even the festive season did not provide Charles with the universal acclaim one might have expected.

While his Christmas Day message of peace and reconciliation was widely praised by church and political leaders, the online reaction was decidedly mixed.

‘The Defender of Faith is as woke as his Church,’ posted one correspondent.

Another wrote: ‘Just a load of **** spewed by an individual who knows absolutely nothing about what hard-working, tax-paying citizens go through 52 weeks of the year.’

Others were critical of the King dwelling on diversity.

‘How on earth can someone who lives in the lap of luxury at the expense of others, honestly deliver a speech telling everyone to celebrate the importation of those whose way of life is utterly incompatible with British values,’ wrote a viewer online.

Some were even more blunt.

‘Worst speech ever. Totally out of touch,’ claimed one.

‘No wonder the Queen held on as long as she did. Charlie doesn’t represent British people in any way,’ said another.

Other comments included: ‘Get William on the throne,’ and ‘Must be nice living in a safe bubble protected from the reality of life and looking at the world through rose-tinted glasses while listening to [Keir] Starmer and his cronies knowing no matter what mess they make, it won’t affect you.’

It would be tempting to dismiss such disaffection as the ranting of a minority, but the numbers voicing such views were not insignificant.

More sobering for courtiers was the fact that those finding fault with the King were not from the agitprop Left but were of the Christian and monarchy-supporting Right.

Recent polls show that Britons still favour retaining the monarchy but, at 51 per cent, that majority is now wafer-thin.

With critics on the Right and the Left, it would not take much for that narrow majority in favour to become a narrow majority against.

For now, at least, 2026 begins on a positive note, thanks to the King’s good news that his cancer treatment will be reduced in the new year.

While he is not in remission, it means that he no longer will need to continue with weekly sessions, although medical intervention will continue for the foreseeable future.

At the age of 77, this is a pivotal change for the King.

His treatment has sapped his energy at times, and he will be hoping that some of his pre-cancer vigour returns.

It will also free him up to do more of the things he likes.

Plans are underway which could see him flying more than 15,000 miles on foreign tours.

These include possible visits to the US for the 250th anniversary of America’s independence from British rule and to Antigua for the Commonwealth heads of government conference in the autumn.

Fifty years ago, the late Queen Elizabeth made a significant state visit celebrating the US’s bicentenary, famously touching the Liberty Bell in Philadelphia, standing on the balcony in Boston where the Declaration of Independence was proclaimed and dancing with a flat-footed President Gerald Ford at the White House.

For her son, however, visiting Donald Trump’s Washington may require more than kingly diplomacy.

Setting foot on American soil will inevitably raise questions about whether he will see his wayward son, Prince Harry and his children, whom he has met only once before.

He last saw his grandchildren, Archie and Lilibet, during the late Queen’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations in 2022.

In September, California-based Harry spent 54 minutes at Clarence House with his father – their first meeting in more than 18 months – after he had publicly expressed hopes of a reconciliation with his family in a TV interview.

But the encounter later descended into farce, with sources close to Harry perversely scorning those who leaked details of an apparently warm experience as being ‘intent on sabotaging any reconciliation between father and son’.

Against such a background some courtiers are privately sceptical of Harry’s calls for a rapprochement. Is it any wonder that the King’s handlers are uneasy?