THOSE two polar opposites in the headline above bookend the spectrum of views on the monarchy.

But there are lots of us with more nuanced positions.

I make no bones about being fond of our late Queen. I should declare an interest. I received an OBE from her hands. What impressed me about that occasion was not getting the gong, but the fact that she effortlessly talked to me about the work which had earned it. It would have been difficult not to be impressed by a woman, then in her late 80s, who had so diligently and graciously done her homework. I was very impressed. She was kind and smiled warmly.

Looking at the crowds gathered around Scotland over the last few days then, fellow nationalists had better get to grips with the reality that the Queen was massively popular and respected in Scotland. Every aspect of her passing, every detail of which would have been personally approved by her, showed a sureness of touch when it came to her ancient northern kingdom.

Unlike Nicholas Witchell of the BBC, for example, she was well-versed in the difference between the Union of the Crowns on the one hand and the Union of the Parliaments on the other. Witchell has been a royal correspondent for more years than any of us (certainly including King Charles!) care to remember, but we can be certain that he has never had one single direct conversation about Scottish independence with the person whose views he professes to know with such certainty and expresses with such ignorance.

READ MORE: King Charles's staff at Clarence House sacked during St Giles' Cathedral service

To be fair, Witchell has been only one of many BBC nervous breakdowns in their cack-handed coverage of the last week. When no-one in their entire bloated commentary team covering the late Queen’s cortege procession through the glorious countryside of the north-east of Scotland, knew why her coffin was draped in the Royal Standard of Scotland – or even what it represented – it was time to switch channels or watch the “public broadcaster” with the sound off.

Because just as nationalists have to come to terms with the Queen’s popularity, Unionist institutions like the BBC have to come to terms with the dawning reality that the late Queen may not have shared all of their prejudices, or more accurately I suspect, she had the priceless ability to change with the times and with the call of duty. They never will.

And so, for what it is worth, here are my reflections on the week that was.

Most people – nationalists, Unionists, monarchists and republicans – admire the Queen for her 70 years of service.

It is difficult not to believe that the Queen fully expected to pass at her beloved Balmoral and that she knew “Operation Unicorn” would be brought into effect.

The institutions of Scotland have risen to the occasion in giving her the sort of dignified send-off she would have wanted.

Many people, while believing protest during a mourning period is simple and rank bad manners, nonetheless are deeply uneasy about the heavy-handed suppression of it.

Perhaps the Lord Advocate could spend less time as a minister equivocating on the independence policy of the Government she accepted service in, and more time cleansing the justice system of the blatant politicisation which is bringing it into such disrepute.

From the police investigating campaigners accused of appending women’s rights stickers to lampposts, to arresting republican protesters, to jailing journalists for inconveniently telling the truth, it is time to call a halt before Scottish justice becomes an oxymoron.

That debate on the future of the monarchy will happen regardless after a respectful period, and so it should. Republicanism will be debated on its merits, not eclipsed by the exemplary 70-year service record of the Queen.

Charles III’s assets in that discussion will be his powerful environmental credentials, his championing of youth opportunity, and his diligent attempts to marry community revival with natural heritage as exemplified by the Dumfries House project. He is arguably a more Scottish king than either of his predecessor’s Stuart namesakes and for that, he will carry great support.

But the list of liabilities is also long – his petulance born of upbringing and his acceptance of dodgy money for good causes in Fortnum and Mason bags will make him an easy target for an establishment press which is deeply suspicious of him and would rather leap to his safer, more compliant, bushy-tailed elder son William.

But in Scotland, his biggest problem is simple. The institution he heads up is the pinnacle of an unsightly class and political system which not only holds us back but would if it just could, eradicate every decent thing about our country, “even her very name”.

Charles, now in his 70s, is a child of that British class system. Even after a half-century apprenticeship, it will be one right royal challenge to outgrow it and rise above it.