Donald Trump’s relationship with Elon Musk is showing no signs of fraying, even after at times he appeared to eclipse the president-elect’s influence as he bullied House Republicans into paring down their bipartisan spending deal to avert a government shutdown with just hours to spare.

The move by Musk to detonate the political equivalent of a nuclear bomb – by demanding that Republicans sink the deal or face a primary challenge – was viewed as a test run of the kind of role Musk might play to pressure Congress once Trump takes office, people familiar with the matter said.

Behind the scenes, even though Trump did not get his own demand for Republicans to raise the debt ceiling, the president-elect suggested Musk’s performance showed he could be a useful catalyst of activity once he takes office and leads the so-called “Department of Government Efficiency”.

The consensus view at Mar-a-Lago was that Musk proved an effective cudgel to pressure Congress and a scapegoat for any backlash, the people said.

It appears to mark a shift in approach for Trump and could suggest he has become more savvy about the political process since his first presidency, when he routinely ran into legislative and optics hurdles as he pursued his agenda.

In 2018, Trump said he would be proud to shut down the federal government if he could not reach a deal with Democrats to include the funding that he wanted for his proposed wall along the US southern border.

“I’ll be the one to shut it down,” Trump boasted to reporters at the time, to the bemusement of then House speaker Nancy Pelosi and then Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer. “I will take the mantle. And I will shut it down for border security.”

The partial government shutdown that followed was the longest in US history, and Trump was caught off guard by the negative public reaction directed at him and his gambit, according to a former Trump White House official. Trump later backtracked on his border-wall funding demand.

This time around, Trump did not publicly back a shutdown himself, even if he privately remarked to aides that he did not mind if it occurred because it would technically happen on Joe Biden’s watch, the people said.

Instead, he left it largely to Musk to make the threat and receive the criticism, before House Speaker Mike Johnson put forward a narrower spending package that Democrats agreed to support just hours before the government was set to shut down.

But although House Democrats mocked Trump as acting like the vice-president with Musk as the president, in an attempt to get under his skin, the extended honeymoon between the two men has continued – in another notable shift for Trump, whose political alliances often lack for longevity.

In Trump’s first term, Trump parted ways with his chief strategist Steve Bannon after he was depicted in the media as the puppeteer of the Oval Office. (One Saturday Night Live skit featured Bannon as the grim reaper standing behind Trump and calling shots in the White House).

The same has not been true for Musk, the people said, mainly because the dynamics are different: as the world’s richest man, Musk has commanded special status with Trump, who has separately liked the idea of having him as his attack dog, while Bannon was always seen as a staffer.

Still, many House Republicans have been left deeply frustrated by what they see as Musk meddling in congressional affairs. Musk was not elected to any office and also bought his way into Trump’s orbit by spending roughly $250m to boost his presidential campaign.

Multiple members complained bitterly about Musk’s influence over them as they found themselves glued to his X account between spending-deal meetings in an acknowledgement that Musk’s willingness to drop colossal amounts of cash made his threats of primary challenges a legitimate concern.

Donald Trump and his allies have started to wage a campaign against media organisations in the US that are critical of the president-elect by launching lawsuits that media experts warn are designed to stifle dissent and potentially put them out of business.

The tactic appears to be to aggressively pursue legal action against news organisations – which Trump has long dubbed “enemies of the people” – by asking for often hefty sums in damages. The cases are launched even if the odds of success sometimes appear long, because even an unsuccessful court action can be expensive for a cash-strapped media company and act as a deterrent.

“The recent spate of lawsuits that he has filed, and his public threat to ‘straighten out the press’, do seem to signal an increased effort by Trump and his allies to go after the press through lawsuits,” said Anna Diakun, staff attorney and managing attorney, fellowship program, for the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University.

Last week alone saw several developments that deeply worry defenders of press freedom in the US.

Trump sued Iowa pollster J Ann Selzer and the Des Moines Register newspaper for alleged “brazen election interference” in a civil suit that shocked free speech defenders.

One advocate said the suit was potentially “the most appalling example” of Trump’s efforts to weaponize courts against opponents.

The survey in question, published days before the election, had shown Democratic opponent Kamala Harris besting Trump by three points in a state that had long been considered a slam-dunk for him. Selzer was proved wrong and Trump later cruised to victory in Iowa with more than 55% of the vote.

Despite winning handily – suggesting the poll had no impact on him whatsoever – Trump still went on the attack.

Trump sued under the Iowa Consumer Fraud Act, claiming Selzer and the newspaper flouted a law meant to protect people from “fraud”. Trump’s suit said the action was necessary “to deter defendants and their fellow radicals from continuing to act with corrupt intent in releasing polls manufactured for the purpose of skewing election results in favor of Democrats”.

But the Iowa suit came after several other Trump legal actions against the press. ABC News reached a $15m settlement with Trump on 14 December – agreeing to pay a foundation and museum to be established by the president-elect, and publicly apologizing – following a defamation suit he filed earlier in 2024.

The suit stemmed from network star George Stephanopoulos’s mistaken comments in an interview that Trump had been found “liable for rape” in a civil lawsuit brought by Elle columnist E Jean Carroll. The jury in fact determined that Trump “sexually abused” Carroll, but did not find that he had raped her.

“We are pleased that the parties have reached an agreement to dismiss the lawsuit on the terms in the court filing,” an ABC News spokesman said of the suit, according to the Associated Press.

Trump is also suing CBS News over Kamala Harris’ interview on 60 Minutes, alleging it had been deceptively edited and also pursuing a copyright action against publisher Simon & Schuster relating to audio recordings of the author’s interviews with him.

Trump has previously said he wants to “take a strong look” at US libel laws, describing them as a “sham and a disgrace and do not represent American values and American fairness”.

“That is the most recent and in one sense, the most appalling example of Mr Trump’s efforts to use the judicial system to punish his critics,” Floyd Abrams, the famed first amendment attorney, said of the Iowa suit.

“It’s not just that there are no damages that he can plausibly state in such a case,” Abrams said, noting that Trump won the election, which undermines claims that he suffered as a result of an incorrect poll. “It appears to be nothing more or less than an effort to punish the newspaper and its pollster, because they dared to take a position which turned out to be inaccurate.

“He is seeking to punish them, he is seeking to harm them, because in his mind, they harmed him by making him worry and leading the pollsters around the country to think the races would be a lot closer than it turned out to be … There’s certainly no justifiable basis for such a lawsuit,” Abrams said.

Several first amendment experts said that ABC’s decision to settle could foster still more attacks on the press.

“His recent settlement victory against ABC is particularly concerning, because it may embolden Trump to file any number of similar lawsuits hoping for the same result,” said Diakun.

Even completely meritless lawsuits present serious risks to the media.

“They often take up considerable time and resources, and can threaten the survival of smaller news outlets that are already struggling to make ends meet,” Diakun said. “Some news organizations may decide to settle frivolous suits to avoid staggering litigation costs and spending months or years defending against the suit.”

“Because of this, these suits will have a significant chilling effect on news outlets. Even the threat of legal action may lead some to self-censor, rather than risk retribution. This is no accident – it appears to be Trump’s goal.”

“The bottom line is that Trump’s lawsuits against media organizations – and his threats to file more – are a danger to press freedom.”

Roy S Gutterman, director of the Newhouse School’s Tully Center for Free Speech at Syracuse University, expressed similar sentiments and pointed out how important America’s media and the freedom of the press were to the healthy functioning of civic society.

“The lawsuits and threats certainly seem like a continuation of Trump’s litigiousness,” Gutterman said. “The difference, now, is that he secured a settlement and looks like he’s transitioning into an administration with broad support from the other branches of government. The system of checks and balances inherent to our governing system seems to be tilted.”

Gutterman said that ABC’s decision to settle “must have looked like a smart thing to do from ABC’s perspective”. This could make it harder for other press, however.

“This could also give impetus to others to sue media outlets hoping for a settlement,” Gutterman said. “There is concern that the fear of being sued might discourage other media outlets from aggressively pursuing the news that might be critical of the administration. That is a real concern.”

The Des Moines Register spokesperson Lark-Marie Anton said they “believe this lawsuit is without merit” and that the paper acknowledged that this poll didn’t reflect Trump’s final margin over Harris. Anton also said they released the survey’s “full demographics, cross tabs, weighted and unweighted data, as well as a technical explanation from pollster Ann Selzer.

“We stand by our reporting on the matter and will vigorously defend our first amendment rights,” Anton said.

The Guardian contacted Trump’s legal and communications team to ask whether they had comment on concerns that lawsuits against media organizations could have a chilling effect on free speech.

Steven Cheung, a Trump spokesperson, said in an email: “President Trump will continue to hold those who have committed, and are committing wrongdoings, accountable for blatantly false and dishonest reporting, which serves no public interest and only seeks to interfere in our elections on behalf of political partisans.”

On a recent icy afternoon in the western Ukrainian city of Kovel, a silver-haired man in military fatigues prepared to board a train. A small boy hugged him at the knees, reluctant to let go. “Come on Dima, say goodbye to grandad,” his mother told him, pulling him away.

A few minutes later, the train pulled out of the station with the man on board, headed on a long journey to the east of the country, towards the frontlines in the fight against Russia. Daughter and grandson, both in tears, waved from the platform.

Similar scenes now play out frequently in Ukraine, where the depleted and exhausted army is increasingly made up of older men. As the country approaches three years of full-scale war with Russia, and waits uneasily for the arrival of Donald Trump in the White House, an acute personnel shortage at the front presents a dilemma.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has resisted public calls from the Biden administration to lower the age at which men can be mobilised from 25, where it currently stands, to 18, citing the sensitivities of sending younger men to fight in a society that already faces a demographic crisis. But with Russia continuing to find fresh recruits for its grinding advances, the army is struggling to find enough people to fill the gaps at the front.

A series of interviews with Ukrainian officers, who spoke anonymously, given the sensitivity of the issue, paint a worrying picture for Ukraine’s war effort.

“The people we get now are not like the people who were there in the beginning of the war,” said one soldier currently serving in Ukraine’s 114th territorial defence brigade, who has been stationed in various hotspots over the past two years. “Recently, we received 90 people, but only 24 of them were ready to move to the positions. The rest were old, sick or alcoholics. A month ago, they were walking around Kyiv or Dnipro and now they are in a trench and can barely hold a weapon. Poorly trained, and poorly equipped,” he said.

Two sources in air defence units told the Guardian the deficit at the front has become so acute that the general staff has ordered already-depleted air defence units to free up more men to send to the front as infantry.

“It’s reaching a critical level where we can’t be sure that air defence can function properly,” said one of the sources, saying he had been prompted to speak out by a fear that the situation was a risk to Ukraine’s security.

“These people knew how air defence works, some had been trained in the West and had real skills, now they are sent to the front to fight, for which they have no training,” said the source.

Commanders can use the orders to send soldiers they do not like to the front, as punishment, said the source. There is also a fear that, equipped with sensitive knowledge about Ukrainian air defence positions and tactics, there is a risk of these soldiers giving up important information if they are captured by Russians at the front.

Last month Mariana Bezuhla, an outspoken and controversial MP, claimed in a post on Telegram that air defence troops were being transferred to infantry units, leading to worse success rates for Ukraine shooting down Russian drones. Yurii Ihnat, a spokesperson for the air defence forces, confirmed at the time that the transfers were taking place, saying they were “very painful”. But he denied that it was affecting shoot-down rates.

Those the Guardian spoke with said the increasing demands for transfers were making it hard to run the air defence units properly, however.

“This has been going on for a year but it’s been getting worse and worse,” said another source, an officer working on air defence. “I’m already down to less than half [of full strength]. In recent days the commission came and they want dozens more. I’m left with those aged 50-plus and injured people. It’s impossible to run things like this,” he said.

While the first months of Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022 saw lines of Ukrainians ready to volunteer, and hundreds of thousands of people have willingly gone to the front since, mobilisation has been a major challenge for Kyiv for the past year, with squads of recruitment officers roaming the streets and handing out call-up papers. Men of conscription age have been barred from leaving the country since the start of the invasion.

Most Ukrainians understand the need for mobilisation, but the policy is unpopular on a personal level, and the recruiting squads often face anger and abuse as they look for new conscripts.

In a telling sign of the changing attitudes in the country, a poll by the Kyiv-based Razumkov Centre over the summer found that 46% of respondents agreed that there was “no shame in evading military service”, while only 29% disagreed.

The personnel shortage has soured relations between Kyiv and Washington over recent months. Officials in the Biden administration felt irritated that Zelenskyy and other officials frequently demanded more weapons, but were unable to mobilise the requisite manpower to fill the ranks.

“Manpower is the most vital need” Ukraine has at the moment, White House national security council spokesperson Sean Savett said in a statement last month. “We’re also ready to ramp up our training capacity if they take appropriate steps to fill out their ranks,” he said.

Ukrainian officials felt the public calls by the US to lower the mobilisation age to 18 was insensitive and inappropriate. Ukraine expanded its mobilisation drive in April, lowering the call-up age to 25 from 27, but a majority of Ukrainians, even those at the front, are wary of lowering it further, citing a need to protect the younger generation.

Many soldiers say that the way to boost mobilisation rates is not by lowering the call-up age but by offering better incentives and more training. “It’s not about age, really, they need good conditions and motivation,” said the soldier from the 114^th brigade. “Eighteen-year-olds are still children. Maybe they could lower it to 23 if necessary, but there are still enough people in Kyiv who could be mobilised but don’t want to go,” he added.

Prince William has agreed to end the last feudal restrictions on land ownership in parts of his hereditary Duchy of Cornwall estate after decades of complaints from residents.

The Prince of Wales will allow tenants in two of the most environmentally sensitive areas of his 55,000-hectare (135,000 acres) estate the right to buy the freehold to their homes for the first time.

Residents of central Dartmoor, the national park, which is the duchy’s largest landholding, and the Somerset village of Newton St Loe, near Bath, will be given the new right under the 2024 Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act, when secondary legislation is introduced by the government to bring it into force.

But the heir to the throne, who has faced criticism after it was revealed that his and King Charles’s property empires are earning millions from cash-straipped public bodies and charities, has refused to extend the freedom to duchy tenants in Scilly.

Leaseholders on the islands off the Cornish coast will now be able to buy much longer 990-year leases for their properties, which the duchy argues is almost as good as the freehold. But the duchy will have the right to buy them back to manage the supply of housing on the islands, under a deal similar to the one that will apply to 5,000 National Trust properties in the government reforms.

The estate, whose profits gave William an income of £23.6m in the year to 31 March, has not informed its tenants about the changes yet but officials have confirmed the outline of the deal to the Observer.

The Duchy of Cornwall, which stretches across 23 counties, was created in 1337 and the laws governing residents and tenants on its land are complex.

The estate resisted efforts to bring it in line with the rest of Britain under the then Prince Charles, demanding exemptions from earlier leasehold reform legislation for Dartmoor, Newton St Loe and Scilly on the grounds of environmental sensitivities and their historic ties with the crown.

But the last Conservative government, which passed the primary legislation, and the new Labour administration, which intends to implement the secondary legislation, both appear to have put pressure on the duchy to change its approach.

Tenants contacted by the Observer gave a cautious welcome to the reforms after years of complaints about exorbitant grounds rents, refusals to extend leases, or the excessive cost of such deals.

Alan Davis owns a house on the edge of the Garrison – a historic fortification built on the Scilly island of St Mary’s towards the end of Elizabeth I’s reign – that has only 35 years left on a 99-year lease.

He welcomed the chance to extend it to 990 years if the cost is not prohibitive and any buyback is fair. “It will depend if the duchy is willing to pay the commercial rate for a freehold house to buy back our leasehold,” he said.

The details still have to be confirmed but the National Trust said it expected to pay market value if it exercised its right to buy back leases on its properties, and assumed the price would be determined by a formal independent valuation.

Davis, 82, a long-term critic of the duchy, accuses William and his staff of milking the islands. “They take out ground rent… [but] the leaseholder does the work and pays for maintaining the property. This can be from £1,500 to £7,000 per annum,” he said.

A duchy spokesperson said: “The Isles of Scilly are England’s only archipelago and, as such, being comprised of a number of small islands at a significant distance from the mainland, have a unique community and economic makeup. Key to this is the limited availability of, and competing demands on, land and property.

“We will fulfil our obligations and the recommendations as set out in the leasehold reform bill. We take our responsibility on the Isles of Scilly seriously and are working to analyse the bill and await secondary legislation, which will provide further detail and clarity.”

Elon Musk has caused outrage in Berlin after appearing to endorse the far-right, anti-immigrant Alternative für Deutschland.

Musk, who has been named by Donald Trump to co-lead a commission aimed at reducing the size of the US federal government, wrote on his social media platform X: “Only the AfD can save Germany.”

He reposted a video by a German rightwing influencer, Naomi Seibt, who criticised Friedrich Merz, the leader of the conservative Christian Democrats who has the best chance of becoming the next German chancellor, and praised Javier Milei, the libertarian president of Argentina.

The German health minister, Karl Lauterbach, called Musk’s decision to wade into the German political debate weeks before the snap election “undignified and highly problematic”.

Europe’s largest economy is expected to go to the polls on 23 February after the collapse last month of Olaf Scholz’s centre-left coalition. The AfD is running in second place in opinion polls. Elements of the party have been classed as rightwing extremists by Germany’s domestic intelligence services, and mainstream parties have vowed to refuse to work with the AfD at national level.

The German government issued only a perfunctory response to Musk’s post, noting that it had registered it, but a spokesperson refused to add any further comment.

At a press conference in Berlin, Scholz responded indirectly to the post, saying: “We have freedom of speech here. That also applies to multimillionaires. Freedom of speech also means that you’re able to say things that aren’t right and do not contain good political advice.”

The German former MEP Elmar Brokdismissed Musk’s comment as “the world domination fantasies of the American tech kings”.

Late on Friday, after at least two people were killed and scores wounded in a suspected terror attack on a Christmas market in the German city of Magdeburg, Musk doubled down, tweeting: “Scholz should resign immediately. Incompetent fool.”

Lauterbach accused Musk of election interference and called for authorities to “keep a close eye on the goings-on on X”.

He said: “It is very disturbing, the way in which the platform X, which I use very intensively myself, is increasingly being used to spread the political positions and goals of Mr Musk.”

The most direct response to the Musk tweet came from Christian Lindner, the head of the pro-business Free Democrats (FDP), who was sacked as finance minister by Scholz over deep disagreements around fiscal management.

Lindner wrote on X: “Elon, I’ve initiated a policy debate inspired by ideas from you and Milei. While migration control is crucial for Germany, the AfD stands against freedom, business – and it’s a far-right extremist party. Don’t rush to conclusions from afar. Let’s meet, and I’ll show you what the FDP stands for. CL”.

In May, the AfD was expelled from a pan-European parliamentary group of populist far-right parties after a string of controversies, including a comment by the senior AfD figure that the Nazi SS were “not all criminals”.

The ID group, which includes France’s far-right National Rally, Italy’s Lega, Austria’s Freedom party, Geert Wilders’ Dutch Freedom party and Vlaams Belang in Belgium, said it “no longer want[ed] to be associated” with such incidents.

Musk has previously expressed backing for other anti-immigration forces across Europe, including the UK’s Reform party and Italy’s prime minister, Giorgia Meloni.

He has also previously voiced enthusiastic support for Milei, who in his first year as Argentina’s president has cut public spending and axed tens of thousands of public sector jobs, and plunged many households into economic despair.

Alice Weidel, the head of the AfD, who is standing as its candidate for chancellor, reposted Musk’s comment, writing to him: “Yes! You are perfectly right @elonmusk!”

Referring to a recent interview she gave on Trump with the news organisation Bloomberg, Weidel said Musk should note “how socialist [Angela] Merkel ruined our country, how the Soviet European Union destroys the country’s economic backbone and malfunctioning Germany”. She wished Musk and Trump a happy Christmas and “all the best for the upcoming tenure”.

Last year Musk criticised the German government and its struggle to tackle illegal migration, one of the main topics on the election campaign agenda. He has also fired off personal jibes against Scholz and his economics minister, Robert Habeck.

This week Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, posted a photograph of himself and the party’s treasurer meeting Musk at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida and claimed Musk was prepared to provide financial support to bolster his party’s chances of entering government.

Elon Musk has caused outrage in Berlin after appearing to endorse the far-right, anti-immigrant Alternative für Deutschland.

Musk, who has been named by Donald Trump to co-lead a commission aimed at reducing the size of the US federal government, wrote on his social media platform X: “Only the AfD can save Germany.”

He reposted a video by a German rightwing influencer, Naomi Seibt, who criticised Friedrich Merz, the leader of the conservative Christian Democrats who has the best chance of becoming the next German chancellor, and praised Javier Milei, the libertarian president of Argentina.

The German health minister, Karl Lauterbach, called Musk’s decision to wade into the German political debate weeks before the snap election “undignified and highly problematic”.

Europe’s largest economy is expected to go to the polls on 23 February after the collapse last month of Olaf Scholz’s centre-left coalition. The AfD is running in second place in opinion polls. Elements of the party have been classed as rightwing extremists by Germany’s domestic intelligence services, and mainstream parties have vowed to refuse to work with the AfD at national level.

The German government issued only a perfunctory response to Musk’s post, noting that it had registered it, but a spokesperson refused to add any further comment.

At a press conference in Berlin, Scholz responded indirectly to the post, saying: “We have freedom of speech here. That also applies to multimillionaires. Freedom of speech also means that you’re able to say things that aren’t right and do not contain good political advice.”

The German former MEP Elmar Brokdismissed Musk’s comment as “the world domination fantasies of the American tech kings”.

Late on Friday, after at least two people were killed and scores wounded in a suspected terror attack on a Christmas market in the German city of Magdeburg, Musk doubled down, tweeting: “Scholz should resign immediately. Incompetent fool.”

Lauterbach accused Musk of election interference and called for authorities to “keep a close eye on the goings-on on X”.

He said: “It is very disturbing, the way in which the platform X, which I use very intensively myself, is increasingly being used to spread the political positions and goals of Mr Musk.”

The most direct response to the Musk tweet came from Christian Lindner, the head of the pro-business Free Democrats (FDP), who was sacked as finance minister by Scholz over deep disagreements around fiscal management.

Lindner wrote on X: “Elon, I’ve initiated a policy debate inspired by ideas from you and Milei. While migration control is crucial for Germany, the AfD stands against freedom, business – and it’s a far-right extremist party. Don’t rush to conclusions from afar. Let’s meet, and I’ll show you what the FDP stands for. CL”.

In May, the AfD was expelled from a pan-European parliamentary group of populist far-right parties after a string of controversies, including a comment by the senior AfD figure that the Nazi SS were “not all criminals”.

The ID group, which includes France’s far-right National Rally, Italy’s Lega, Austria’s Freedom party, Geert Wilders’ Dutch Freedom party and Vlaams Belang in Belgium, said it “no longer want[ed] to be associated” with such incidents.

Musk has previously expressed backing for other anti-immigration forces across Europe, including the UK’s Reform party and Italy’s prime minister, Giorgia Meloni.

He has also previously voiced enthusiastic support for Milei, who in his first year as Argentina’s president has cut public spending and axed tens of thousands of public sector jobs, and plunged many households into economic despair.

Alice Weidel, the head of the AfD, who is standing as its candidate for chancellor, reposted Musk’s comment, writing to him: “Yes! You are perfectly right @elonmusk!”

Referring to a recent interview she gave on Trump with the news organisation Bloomberg, Weidel said Musk should note “how socialist [Angela] Merkel ruined our country, how the Soviet European Union destroys the country’s economic backbone and malfunctioning Germany”. She wished Musk and Trump a happy Christmas and “all the best for the upcoming tenure”.

Last year Musk criticised the German government and its struggle to tackle illegal migration, one of the main topics on the election campaign agenda. He has also fired off personal jibes against Scholz and his economics minister, Robert Habeck.

This week Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, posted a photograph of himself and the party’s treasurer meeting Musk at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida and claimed Musk was prepared to provide financial support to bolster his party’s chances of entering government.

Baron Edmond de Rothschild was one of Europe’s richest and best connected men. But his lifelong hobby – hunting the autographs of the famous – was more akin to that of an idolising youngster.

Nine decades after his death, more than 220 letters he collected over 60 years have just been discovered at Waddesdon Manor, the former Rothschild home, now owned by the National Trust.

The list includes Queen Elizabeth I, Nelson, Byron, Benjamin Franklin, Victor Hugo, Peter Paul Rubens and Madame de Pompadour, plus a few signed documents, including a music manuscript by Mozart and an invoice of his rival, Salieri. “This is a really fascinating discovery,” said Pom Harrington, managing director of the rare books and manuscripts company Peter Harrington. “He clearly delighted in the signatures and letters of some of the most important people in the world.”

But why did a man, himself famous and from Europe’s wealthiest family, want to collect them? Rothschild briefly explained his hobby in an unpublished 1931 memoir, written in French three years before his death: “As a child, I remember coming into the salon before a dinner my parents were hosting for the foreign diplomats to sign the Treaty of Paris of March 1856, and asking them to sign my little album. It was fashionable at the time, as it still is, to ask the famous men of the day to sign their autograph.”

Rothschild’s collection of bought and sought letters was then given to his son James, who had moved from France to Britain after the first world war. On his death in 1957, it went to his widow, Dorothy, who left it to the Waddesdon archive in the 1980s. Surprisingly, nobody had opened the box until a French antiquarian came to Waddesdon last summer. “We then realised what was inside, and have been cataloguing since,” said Catherine Taylor, head of archives at Waddesdon.

The earliest are two letters in French from Elizabeth I. One, from 1588, is to King Henri IV of France. She addresses him as “my dear brother – the most Christian king”. “The gist of her letter is to warn Henri to watch his back with the Spanish,” said Taylor.

The second letter, written in 1583, is to the Prince de Valentinois, in which the queen thanks him for some horses. The letters both have her stylish signature. Letters by Elizabeth can fetch about £100,000 – although Waddesdon makes it very clear that none are for sale.

Nelson’s letter to a vicar, thanking him for a gift of “game” (presumably deer or bird) is from 1802, five years after he lost his right arm. The National Maritime Museum suggests that, after learning to write with his left, he was more painstaking than with his erstwhile scrawly right hand. It is signed “Nelson Bronte”, as he had been made Duke of Bronte after a Sicilian naval victory.

Byron, noted as much for his love life as his poems, has written to James Wedderburn Webster, the husband of one of his mistresses, Lady Frances Webster. There are two letters from one of the world’s most famous paramours, Madame de Pompadour, Louis XV’s lover.

Another missive has George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham – long believed to be James I’s lover – writing to Cardinal Richelieu, the French prelate, about marriage negotiations between Princess Henrietta Maria and James’s son Charles, his successor as king.

There is also a letter from the great Italian violinist Niccolò Paganini saying that he would be “happy to play for Baroness Betty” – a reference to Edmond’s mother.

Perhaps the most significant item is from the US polymath Benjamin Franklin to the Dutch scientist Jan Ingenhousz. Franklin writes of filling a balloon “with inflammable air”, and “contriving to fire it by electricity” and “match … the thunder of nature”. Dating the letter 2 September 1783, Franklin, who was US ambassador to France, writes that “tomorrow is to be signed our definitive treaty [the Treaty of Paris] which establishes for the present the Peace of Europe and America … Adieu, yours most affectionately”.

“These letters are a window into an insatiable curiosity,” says Dame Hannah Rothschild, chair of the Rothschild Foundation. “Names leap off the pages with tales of the past and stories that have been waiting to be told.”

A selection of letters will appear in an exhibition at Waddesdon, planned for spring 2025.

Members of Greece’s former royal family have applied for Greek citizenship and formally acknowledged the country’s republican system of government, in a landmark move 50 years after the monarchy was abolished, officials have confirmed.

The late king Constantine II and his family members were stripped of Greek citizenship in 1994 in a dispute with the government over formerly royal property and claims that he refused to renounce any right to the Greek throne for his descendants.

Interior ministry official Athanasios Balerpas said relatives of the late king, who died last year at the age of 82, signed a declaration on Thursday acknowledging the republican government and adopting a new surname, “De Grece” – French for “of Greece”.

But their choice to apply using the family name “De Grece” – which means “of Greece” in French – has annoyed leftwing politicians, with one claiming it creates “confusion”.

“When they say that they are giving up their titles and any future claims [to the throne], by opting for this family name they create confusion,” the Socialist party said.

For the leftwing Syriza party, “the choice of family name is problematic … because the Greek legal order does not recognise titles and nobilities”.

Officials have not officially named the applicants. But Greek news media widely reported that 10 family members have sought citizenship, including all five children of Constantine II and former Queen Anne-Marie – Alexia, Pavlos, Nikolaos, Theodora and Philippos – as well as five of the late king’s grandchildren.

“A historically pending matter is being resolved,” interior ministry official Balerpas told state-run radio. “Let’s look to the future now. I think it’s a good moment because it closes an account from the past and we can now look forward as a people.”

The Greek monarchy was abolished by referendum in December 1974, when voters overwhelmingly backed a republican constitution, months after the fall of a seven-year military dictatorship.

Members of the royal family lived in exile for decades before Constantine returned as a private citizen in his seventies. The 1994 stripping of their Greek citizenship occurred during a legal battle over the former royal estate, which is now state-owned.

They had previously refused to adopt a surname, distancing themselves from the name Glucksburg, assigned in a 1994 law, which they saw as linking them too closely to their German ancestry and making them seem less legitimately Greek.

The decision on citizenship must now be published in the official government gazette before they can apply for state identity cards and Greek passports.

Legislators from centre-left and leftwing opposition parties said the former royal family members should not have been permitted to choose their own surname – with some arguing it sounded like a title rather than a standard surname – but did not oppose their right to citizenship.

With Associated Press and Agence France-Presse

Dozens of sites linked to the Viking great army as it ravaged Anglo-Saxon England more than 1,000 years ago have been discovered. Leading experts from York University have traced the archaeological footprint of the Scandinavian invaders, identifying previously unknown sites and routes.

The study, conducted by Dawn M Hadley, professor of medieval archaeology, and fellow archaeology professor Julian D Richards, found that the significance of many of the ingots, gaming pieces and other artefacts unearthed by metal detectorists over the years had been overlooked until now. They also discovered about 50 new sites that they believe were visited by the Viking great army.

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicles, the collection of annals in Old English, recorded that the “great heathen army” arrived in 865. Over 15 years, battles were fought in the kingdoms of East Anglia, Northumbria, Mercia and Wessex, kings were overthrown, monasteries were looted and society was transformed as Viking leaders adopted Anglo-­Saxon styles of kingship, converted to Christianity and engaged in political diplomacy.

Richards and Hadley have identified Viking sites and routes by comparing artefacts unearthed across the country with those discovered at two of their main camps, Torksey in Lincolnshire and Aldwark in North Yorkshire.

Richards said that gaming pieces thought to have been first manufactured at Torksey, for example, were identified on main routes or transhipment points more than 100 miles away. These were pieces from a strategic board game similar to chess.

The artefacts studied include dress fittings, such as strap ends, and exchanged bullion – notably silver, gold, and copper-alloy ingots, weights and Islamic dirhams – among objects acquired by the Vikings from as far afield as Ireland and the Islamic world.

One site in Yorkshire has been identified through various metal detector finds, including a cross-shaped mount whose matching other half was, remarkably, unearthed miles away in Lincolnshire. The discoveries show how members of the Viking army cut up pieces of loot and each took their share, according to Hadley.

She said: “The finds reflect that the great army was not simply a military force but a community of men, women, children, craftworkers and merchants. The new evidence reflects the wide range of activities undertaken at the camps, from creating metalwork, minting coins and engaging in trade.”

Richards said: “Many of the sites have not previously been published as great army sites by us or anyone else. Some of these suggest short periods of Viking activity, but in others we argue that the great army started a period of enduring Scandinavian settlement.”

The academics will include their findings in their forthcoming book, Life in the Viking Great Army: Raiders, Traders, and Settlers, to be published by Oxford University Press in January. It will feature discoveries such as a fragment of scrap lead from Aldwark depicting Fenrir, the monstrous wolf of Norse mythology, and fittings from harnesses and sword belts.

Many of the previously unseen finds will be unveiled at the Yorkshire Museum’s new Vikings display, which opens in July.

Negotiations are being finalised for a large loan from an American collector, Gary Johnson, an art director and illustrator based in southern California, who has built up an important collection of Viking artefacts, including trade weights and Islamic silver coins, which the Vikings brought back from the Middle East.

He began collecting more than 30 years ago, casually searching for material in the early days of the internet. It was after showing the objects to Richards that he discovered their importance, dating them to the 870s, when Halfdan Ragnarsson led the Viking army.

Johnson said: “It’s fascinating to be holding something in your hand that’s 1,100 years old, knowing that it’s from Ragnarsson’s great heathen army. What more Viking-sounding phrases are there than the ‘great heathen army’?” Of his loan, he added: “[It] should be there for people to share. What good is it for me just to have it sitting here?”

A 77-year-old environmental activist will spend Christmas in prison despite having been released on an electronic tag, because the authorities cannot find an electronic device small enough to fit her wrists.

Gaie Delap, a retired teacher and a Quaker from Bristol, was jailed in August, along with four co-defendants, for her part in a campaign of disruptive Just Stop Oil protests on the M25 in November 2022.

She was released in November to serve the rest of her sentence under a home detention curfew. But the private company contracted to fit the tag to Delap was unable to attach one to her ankle because of a health condition and did not have a tag available small enough to fit wrists her size.

With no device monitoring her, an arrest warrant was issued two weeks ago. Delap has been at home with her suitcase packed since then, waiting for police to knock on her door. On Friday evening, police arrived and took her to Eastwood Park prison in Gloucestershire.

Delap’s supporters fear that not only will she now have to spend Christmas in prison, but may also have to serve the remainder of her sentence behind bars.

Delap, who has various health problems, could not wear an ankle tag because she was at risk of deep-vein thrombosis. The same issue with tagging arose when she was on bail and a “doorstep curfew” was agreed from 7pm to 7am, with random checks incorporated. Such an alternative was not offered this time.

A statement from Delap’s brother Mick Delap and a former probation officer and friend, Mike Campbell, said: “We are outraged by Gaie’s recall to prison. We know this is cruel, and totally unnecessary. We know there are alternatives to the tag. We know that if she had been a man, a tag would have been available.

“Gaie is absolutely no threat to the community. This recall to prison is a ridiculous waste of resources and money. We want common sense to prevail and ask for her rerelease.”

At the time of Delap’s sentence, her MP, Carla Denyer, said she had deep concern over the “disproportionate sentence” given to Delap, whose actions were “entirely peaceful and non-violent and designed to draw attention to the threat posed by the climate emergency”.

Denyer previously said: “My jaw hit the floor when I heard about this case. It’s beyond absurd. I have gone straight to the prisons minister, Lord Timpson, about this case. This is a disproportionate crackdown on climate protesters. It’s clear that Gaie poses no threat to her fellow citizens.”

In a response to her letter dated 17 December 2024, Timpson wrote that ministers and officials could not interfere with sentences imposed by independent courts, and as no strap small enough to fit her wrist has been found, Delap would be recalled “in accordance with the law … until a suitable alternative can be found”.

A spokesperson for HM Prison and Probation Service said: “We have a duty to enforce sentences passed down by the independent judiciary. The law states anyone released under home detention curfew must be tagged and recalled if no alternative solution is available.”

Delap was among several dozen Just Stop Oil supporters who, during a four-day campaign, climbed gantries over the M25, which encircles London, forcing police to stop traffic and leaving an estimated 709,000 drivers stuck in tailbacks.

Meat-eaters who abstain to take part in Veganuary are more likely to think that meat is disgusting after giving it up for the month, researchers have found.

Studies by psychologists at the University of Exeter also found that some people identify less as meat-eaters after trying to avoid animal products during January.

The findings suggest that people’s beliefs around their diets are likely to follow their actions and may have implications for people hoping to change other behaviours, such as those giving up alcohol for dry January.

“Normally, the idea is to educate people first to change their attitudes, and hopefully they end up changing their behaviour,” said Natalia Lawrence, an associate professor of psychology at the University of Exeter. “But if you persuade people to change their behaviour for a month, it seems that these things follow.”

Veganuary began in 2014 after Jane Land and her partner, Matthew Glover, came up with the idea following the success of Movember, which Glover had taken part in. Since then, plant-based foods have become mainstream, with National Trust members voting last month that at least half of the food on menus at its 300 cafes should be plant-based.

Lawrence, working with PhD researcher Sophie Hearn and others at Exeter, has conducted a number of studies into Veganuary, funded by the Medical Research Council.

A study in Frontiers in Nutrition journal tracked 40 participants to measure meat disgust before and after they took part in the abstinence month, finding that although most participants lapsed back into eating meat, those who reduced their meat consumption the most were more likely to have greater disgust for meat afterwards.

Surveys of 46 Veganuary participants last year, published in Appetite, a scientific journal, found they were significantly less likely to say they identified as a meat-eater.

“We know that identity strongly shapes food choices, so by encouraging participants to view themselves as individuals who reduce or avoid meat, Veganuary may pave the way for lasting, positive changes in dietary habits,” Hearn said.

The likely psychological mechanism is that people are unconsciously trying to resolve a cognitive dissonance between a behaviour – taking part in Veganuary – and a belief – that they enjoy eating meat.

There are other cognitive dissonances around meat-eating that people avoid through defensive rationalisations, Lawrence said. “Most people think it’s wrong to be cruel to animals, and [large amounts] of meat in the UK is produced in factory farms, which something like 75% of UK adults agree should be banned,” she said. “So most people are not acting in line with their values when they’re eating meat.

“But what research suggests is that they either avoid thinking about it, or they tell themselves that the animals were well treated, or that you have to eat meat to be healthy.”

Campaigns such as Veganuary can be effective because they persuade people to temporarily lower their defences, Lawrence said. “Because they’re no longer eating meat during that month, they don’t need to be avoiding thinking about it.”

Similar effects may change people’s attitudes to alcohol and socialising during dry January. Negative attitudes towards alcohol-free drinks, or beliefs that social occasions require people to drink alcohol, may be undermined by a temporary change in behaviour.

The Exeter team is planning a further round of research looking at both dry January and Veganuary in the new year.

“We want to test some strategies to help people deal with barriers they might face,” Hearn said. Some participants will be given strategies to try, compared to a control group who take part as normal.

Toni Vernelli, Veganuary’s head of communications, said the organisation was pleased to see that Exeter’s research backed up its own participant surveys.

“At the end of their Veganuary pledge, more than 80% of participants tell us they plan to permanently reduce their meat and dairy consumption by at least 50%.

“This finding has been consistent for the past five years. Our participants report the same top challenges too – dealing with friends and family and eating out. We’re very excited to support Exeter University with new research investigating protocols for tackling these barriers.”