The Royal Rules Queen Elizabeth II Reportedly Enforced — From Garlic to Monopoly

Life inside the British Royal Family has always come with an extraordinary number of traditions, expectations and unwritten rules.

Some are obvious. Members of the monarchy are expected to behave with discretion, follow formal protocol and understand that even seemingly ordinary moments can attract international attention.

Others are considerably harder to explain.

During her long reign, Queen Elizabeth II was reportedly responsible for a collection of household preferences and royal conventions that ranged from food and language to board games and even the noise made by household staff.

Some of these stories have been repeated so often that they have become accepted as royal folklore. Others have been challenged by people who actually worked for the family.

That distinction matters.

The former Queen's alleged rules weren't always formal royal laws. In several cases, they appear to have been personal preferences that became household conventions.

And some of the strangest stories reveal something fascinating about life behind the palace walls.

Here are some of the most unusual rules and restrictions associated with Queen Elizabeth II.

Garlic Was Reportedly Kept Off the Royal Table

Tim Graham/Getty Images

For most families, garlic is simply another ingredient.

Inside the royal household, however, it reportedly had a much more complicated reputation.

Former royal chef Darren McGrady has repeatedly discussed Queen Elizabeth II's dislike of garlic and strong onions.

McGrady explained that the Queen disliked both the smell and taste of garlic, meaning it was generally avoided when preparing food for her.

The distinction is important, however, because McGrady later clarified that garlic was not technically a formal royal "ban."

Instead, it was a matter of personal preference.

"There weren't banned foods," McGrady said in a later interview, explaining that the Queen viewed garlic and strong onions as "antisocial."

The reasoning was surprisingly practical.

Members of the Royal Family regularly met members of the public, diplomats, politicians and other officials. Strong-smelling foods could potentially make close conversations uncomfortable.

Queen Elizabeth wasn't the only royal with strong opinions about garlic.

Prince Philip reportedly enjoyed it, creating the possibility of an amusing contrast between the couple's culinary preferences.

King Charles III and Queen Camilla have also spoken about avoiding garlic, particularly when attending public engagements where they are expected to interact closely with other people.

Camilla once explained that garlic was essentially a no-go because nobody wants to have an important conversation with someone who has eaten a particularly strong garlic dish.

So while the idea of a strict "garlic law" may be exaggerated, the Queen's dislike of the ingredient appears to have been very real.

Did Queen Elizabeth Actually Ban Shellfish?

Max Mumby/indigo/Getty Images

This is another famous royal-food story where the reality is more complicated than the headline.

For years, reports have suggested that members of the Royal Family avoid shellfish because of the risk of food poisoning.

The reasoning sounds sensible.

A working royal could have dozens of engagements scheduled across several days. Becoming seriously ill after eating contaminated food could disrupt an entire schedule.

Former royal butler Grant Harrold has previously discussed the reported preference for avoiding seafood while traveling or attending public engagements.

But former royal chef Darren McGrady offered a very different picture.

According to McGrady, Queen Elizabeth did eat shellfish.

He recalled preparing dishes including scallops and shrimp for her, including during travel.

That makes the idea of an absolute royal shellfish ban difficult to support.

There is also evidence that other senior royals have happily eaten seafood in public.

King Charles and Queen Camilla, for example, famously participated in events connected with Whitstable's oyster tradition.

So the more accurate explanation may be that shellfish was treated cautiously rather than universally prohibited.

That distinction is important because food safety can be a legitimate concern for people who travel frequently or have demanding schedules.

And shellfish is also among the most common food allergens.

For royals, the bigger concern may simply have been avoiding anything that could unexpectedly interfere with public duties.

The Royal Vocabulary Was Reportedly Different From Everyone Else's

Wpa Pool/Getty Images

Perhaps the strangest alleged rules had nothing to do with food at all.

They concerned language.

According to repeated reports about royal etiquette, Queen Elizabeth disliked certain everyday words and preferred more traditional or formal alternatives.

One of the best-known examples is the word "toilet."

Members of the Royal Family were reportedly expected to use terms such as "lavatory" or "loo" instead.

Other supposedly discouraged words included "couch," with "sofa" preferred, and "perfume," with "scent" considered more appropriate in some accounts.

Even "pardon" has been listed among words supposedly discouraged in royal conversation, with "sorry" or "excuse me" preferred instead.

The stories have circulated widely, but there is an important caveat.

There is limited evidence that Queen Elizabeth personally issued a formal written list of forbidden words.

Much of what is described online as a "royal vocabulary ban" appears to come from etiquette commentary and accounts of aristocratic speech rather than an official palace rulebook.

Still, the stories reflect a broader reality.

Royal households have historically placed enormous importance on manners, speech, etiquette and social conventions.

Language can communicate class, background and formality.

For an institution built around ceremony, even a seemingly ordinary word can become part of the culture.

Why Monopoly Was Reportedly Too Dangerous for the Royals

Pool/tim Graham Picture Library/Getty Images

Few people would expect a board game to become a source of royal controversy.

But Monopoly apparently managed to do exactly that.

In 2008, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, then known as Prince Andrew, reportedly explained why Monopoly wasn't played at home.

The reason was simple.

It became too competitive.

The comment came after he was given the board game during a visit to a building society in Leeds.

Rather than accepting the game for family use, he reportedly explained that the Royal Family wasn't allowed to play it because the competition could become too intense.

The story has since become one of the most entertaining pieces of royal trivia.

And Prince William later offered his own insight into competitive family games.

During a 2021 radio interview, he acknowledged that he played Monopoly with his children and joked that some people could become rather unhappy when they lost.

Perhaps the Queen's rule was less about Monopoly itself and more about knowing what happens when competitive personalities sit around the same table.

There was apparently no similar problem with every game.

Charades has long been associated with royal family gatherings, while Queen Elizabeth was also reportedly fascinated by video games.

Queen Elizabeth and the Nintendo Wii

The contrast is almost impossible to ignore.

The monarch who supposedly couldn't tolerate Monopoly's competitive atmosphere apparently had an interest in Nintendo's Wii.

The story reportedly began after Princess Catherine gave Prince William a Wii console as a Christmas present.

According to reports, Queen Elizabeth became interested in the device and wanted to try it herself.

Her reported favorite was ten-pin bowling.

The image of Britain's longest-reigning monarch competing on a Wii bowling game is certainly memorable.

But it also illustrates something frequently overlooked when discussing Queen Elizabeth.

Behind the formal public image, she had a reputation for enjoying ordinary entertainment and humor.

The woman who spent decades performing ceremonial duties could apparently enjoy sitting down for a game just like anyone else.

Vacuuming Before 8 a.m. Was Reportedly Out

Chris Jackson/Getty Images

If there was one rule that palace employees might have found particularly understandable, it was the reported restriction on early-morning vacuuming.

Royal author Gyles Brandreth has written that Queen Elizabeth preferred a slow start to the day and generally began her working routine later in the morning.

That preference has been linked to reports that vacuuming before 8 a.m. was discouraged within her households.

For staff working in enormous royal residences, that could create an unusual logistical challenge.

Buckingham Palace alone contains hundreds of rooms and spaces.

Maintaining such a property requires an enormous amount of work, from housekeeping and maintenance to food preparation and security.

A vacuum cleaner might be efficient, but it is hardly silent.

And if the monarch preferred quiet mornings, a cleaner arriving with a loud machine before breakfast would presumably not be the ideal start to the day.

Some accounts have gone even further, suggesting that palace staff sometimes relied on quieter cleaning methods to avoid disturbing royal residents.

The idea makes more sense when viewed as a household preference rather than a permanent prohibition.

After all, someone eventually has to clean a palace.

The Strange Rules Tell a Bigger Story

The fascination with Queen Elizabeth's alleged rules isn't really about garlic, shellfish, Monopoly or vacuum cleaners.

It is about how differently ordinary life can operate inside an institution that has been shaped by centuries of tradition.

For most people, deciding what to eat for dinner or which board game to play is completely unremarkable.

Inside a royal household, even those decisions can become part of a carefully maintained routine.

There is also an important lesson in the conflicting reports.

Some supposed royal "bans" were probably exaggerated over time.

Others were genuine personal preferences.

And some were practical precautions that gradually became described as rules.

That is why the most accurate way to understand these stories is not to imagine Queen Elizabeth walking around Buckingham Palace with a rulebook listing every forbidden food and forbidden word.

Her influence was often much more subtle.

A preference expressed by the monarch could quickly become the standard followed by household staff.

A food she disliked could disappear from menus.

A particular form of etiquette could become routine.

A quiet morning could influence how staff organized their work.

And a competitive board game could simply be considered more trouble than it was worth.

Queen Elizabeth Could Also Make Exceptions

Perhaps the most interesting part is that the Queen herself did not always follow every convention in the way people might expect.

Her decision to support the royal titles of Prince William and Catherine's children demonstrated that the monarch could exercise constitutional and family influence when circumstances required it.

The rules surrounding royal titles have evolved over generations, and decisions about succession and status are ultimately shaped by formal constitutional arrangements rather than household preferences.

That makes the distinction between royal protocol and personal preference particularly important.

Some things are established by law.

Others are established by tradition.

And some exist simply because the person at the top of the household says, in effect, "That's how we do things here."

The Royal Family Has Changed Since Her Reign

Queen Elizabeth II died in September 2022 after more than 70 years on the throne.

King Charles III has since inherited the crown, and the Royal Family has entered a different era.

Some traditions have continued.

Others have gradually changed.

The younger generation, including Prince William and Catherine, Princess of Wales, has generally been associated with a more modern approach to public life, particularly around technology, family life and communication.

Yet the fascination with Queen Elizabeth's unusual household preferences remains.

Perhaps that is because they provide a glimpse behind the ceremony.

The photographs show crowns, palaces, state dinners and grand occasions.

The stories about garlic, games, vocabulary and vacuum cleaners reveal something much more ordinary.

They show a household in which even the smallest decisions could be influenced by one extraordinary fact:

The person making the preference was the Queen.

And that may be the strangest royal rule of all.