One of my favorite sub-genres of “coronation gossip” was all of the reporting about the random aristocrats who were so pissed off that they were not invited to the coronation. There were multiple stories for months about titled “peers of the realm” leaving angry voicemail messages and sending strongly-worded parchments to the Duke of Norfolk, who was in charge of the whole fiasco. King Charles didn’t invite most of the non-royal dukes and they were ready to storm the castle. Charles didn’t even invite many royal-adjacents and various cousins, nor did he invite anyone from the Mountbatten family. Of course, Katy Perry and Queen Camilla’s ex-husband got invites. Yeah. As I said before the Chubbly, if the aristos are truly angry about it, it’s going to be a slow-burn gossip story. It looks like people are still steamed. From Hugo Vickers piece in the Mail:

Up and down the country the aristocrats are hopping mad. Almost all of them were excluded from the Coronation. I’m told that the Duke of Norfolk – who as Earl Marshal had a key role in organising the ceremony – was bombarded by letters from peers explaining why they should be there.

When giving talks and lectures in the months beforehand, I found myself assailed by disappointed hereditary peers whose robes would be remaining in the cupboard. One of them assured me that as a peer of the realm, he had an ‘inalienable right’ to be present at a Coronation.

I am all for inclusivity and for acknowledging changing times. But I have this rather controversial suggestion to make: that when Prince William starts planning his own Coronation, he shows the decency to invite an element of the aristocrats back. It’s true that the nobility have lost influence over time. In the early years of the Queen’s reign, for example, her equerry Patrick Plunket, would tell her that the aristocracy were getting restive – and she would give a ball.

But it is a shame to risk alienating them. I even had one irritated peer (in the House of Lords) saying – ‘Just wait till the King asks for more money from Parliament…’

We had crowds of TV and sporting celebrities. Would it not have been easy enough to invite five Dukes, Marquesses etc – 25 seats for the hereditary peers? The world has changed. Ant & Dec in; the hereditary peers out for the first time in 1,000 years.

I’m not suggesting that William should invite all the peers to his Coronation when, eventually, that takes place – just a representative sample. They are, after all, a part of the way things are done. They still own large parts of England and Scotland. They understand the concept of public service in the same way as the monarchy and many of them devote their public lives to duty.
The King is there by hereditary right. So are they. And to complain that the peers of the realm are a mere relic of the past is to raise awkward questions about the monarchy itself.

[From The Daily Mail]

The fact that the aristocrats are still seething, weeks after the coronation and that the Daily Mail is reporting on it? Yeah. It’s bad. Bad for King Charles, I mean. Hilarious for everyone else. What’s especially crazy is that Charles – more than his heir – is quite close to many aristocrats, to many of the titled dukes, earls, viscounts, lords and what have you. He socializes with them and they helped facilitate and cover up his affairs for decades. These are the people who know a lot of dirt about Charles and Camilla, I’m just saying. It would be such a shame if the Duke of Fancybottom suddenly felt the urge to write a scathing takedown of the new king. It would be so devastating for the new reign if the Earl of Corgipaw wanted to make a big fuss about it. Also, this is a major threat: “to complain that the peers of the realm are a mere relic of the past is to raise awkward questions about the monarchy itself.” You think the aristocracy is out of touch with the modern world, Charles? Guess what.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Avalon Red.