People Magazine published additional excerpts from their cover story this week: “Why Harry’s Going Without Meghan.” In yesterday’s excerpts, we learned from “sources” that the Duchess of Sussex was thinking about going to the coronation to support her father-in-law, but she didn’t want to have to put herself through “the scrutiny” of the British media. “Scrutiny” being some kind of euphemism for targeted hate campaign. Anyway, these new excerpts are putting more of an emphasis on Harry’s perspective. Keep in mind, for days now, Buckingham Palace has been leaking a steady stream of “olive branch” stories, trying to make King Charles sound magnanimous and wise, a doting father and grandfather who has heart-to-heart conversations with his darling boy. Except that sources tell People that Charles didn’t even contact Harry directly for a while.

The coronation invite: When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex received an email about the royal event from Charles’ office — and not from Harry’s father himself — it became clear that the “sit-down” the prince sought to talk through their issues following the release of his memoir Spare wasn’t going to happen, a close friend tells PEOPLE exclusively in this week’s cover story. “They didn’t hear from Charles. Harry wanted to hear from his father directly — it’s always through somebody,” the friend says.

Harry & Charles eventually did speak over the phone: With the coronation just weeks away and the big question of whether the Duke and Duchess of Sussex would attend the historic ceremony remaining, the estranged father and son ultimately connected — although not in person — and had “positive conversations,” a source says.

Charles’s first wish: A source who knows the royals tells PEOPLE it would be King Charles’ “first wish” for Harry to join them at the coronation. “Despite the wounds, it’s his son, and I can’t imagine he wouldn’t want him to be there regardless of the hurtful things that have been said,” royal biographer Sally Bedell Smith adds.

Why Harry is going: For Prince Harry, his solo appearance at the coronation has everything to do with his desire to have, as he has stated, a “family, not an institution.” “This is about a son showing up for his father rather than the optics of the institution,” the close friend says.

No family reconciliation: “What they wanted wasn’t achieved,” the insider continued. “But at the end of the day, he’s going there to support his dad.”

[From People]

Yeah, I believe that Charles and Harry weren’t speaking and that the e-vite came through staff. I think Charles has regularly cut off personal communications with Harry over the years, and I’d be willing to bet that father and son did not speak over the phone from, like, October of last year through March. Charles was pissy about the Netflix series and Spare, and his punishment was clear: evicting the Sussexes from Frogmore Cottage. My other theory is that Charles’s childish silent treatment was probably the major reason why Harry didn’t confirm his attendance until last week. He was like: I can give you the silent treatment too, dad. Harry went radio silent about the coronation and Charles freaked out and eventually called Harry. I bet you that’s how it happened.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

Monday marked the debut of Live with Kelly and Mark, the newly minted married co-hosts of the long-running morning talk show. Mark Conseulos officially took over for Ryan Seacrest to sit next to his wife of 26-years, Kelly Ripa, on the show she’s hosted since 2001. Mark’s frequently filled in as a guest host with Kelly so this transition was seamless and effortless. Or was it? Two days into the all KellyandMark, all the time experiment and things are not going well. They are getting what conservatively is being called mixed reviews and what most are calling “backlash” or “brutal” critique. Viewers feel the couple overshare about their bedroom activity, that their newlywed schtick is silly, and their PDA is cloying. Plus, they really wish Kelly would let Mark finish one of his sentences. All of this makes me wonder, have these people never watched Kelly or Mark before?!

Married couple Kelly Ripa and Mark Consuelos faced more social media criticism during their second day hosting “Live” together.

“Gosh I don’t know with them together,” tweeted one viewer. “I am not a fan. Loved Ryan and all his stories, he brought another layer to the show.

“Kelly and Mark look uncomfortable together, it’s hard to watch. Mark as a fill in cohost was fun to watch. This isn’t fun to watch anymore. Need Ryan back.”

“Painful! When does Mark get to finish his own sentences??” noted one less-than-impressed fan. “Annoying, changed the channel. Bye-bye Live!

The “Riverdale” alum defended the first episode.

“This show today truly felt like home,” the actor told Us Weekly Monday. “I always feel at home with Kelly, but [working] together this morning just felt so right.”

He added that the couple has “always” felt at “ease” when they are together, and he feels “lucky we get to do that daily” as co-hosts.

“I can’t wait to see where we can go from here,” he added.
Ripa, also heaped praise on her husband’s debut, telling the magazine that she thought he did an “amazing” job and “better than (she) ever thought possible. “He’s a natural, and I have a good feeling this is going to be great for a while.”

[From Page Six]

I’ve only seen clips of Kelly and Mark on the show. They seemed like all their other clips, which I don’t love but I don’t know why everyone hates them now. I do think Mark seems a little more nervous, but that’s to be expected. And even though everything I thought would happen is happening, I still think they should be given longer than two days to prove themselves. Everyone needs to find their groove, even marrieds. Hopefully they will take the feedback and tweak their onscreen dynamic because seriously, right now it does feel like we’re at dinner with the annoying neighbors who only talk to each other.

The part I want to focus on is Kelly not letting Mark finish his sentences. I’ve been curious ever since they announced his hire about what their work dynamic would be. She’s been there 22 years, is she his boss? She definitely has seniority; does she get to make calls that he doesn’t? If the audience ultimately responds better to Mark, will Kelly can get ousted? That would be a hard hurdle to get over at home. Even if Mark gets fired, that’ll make for uncomfortable pillow-talk. I hope they thought this through because ABC is loyal only to their numbers. They don’t care about how blowing up an online partnership affects the relationship offline, they’ve proven that time and again. So Kelly running roughshod over Mark isn’t great. Not only does it establish her seniority, it kind of looks like she doesn’t trust him, despite her glowing review above. Plus, it’s annoying to watch. Again, I’ll wait out the first week because they’re probably both anxious. But I’d expect those kinds of nerves from two people just coming together. These are two people who have been together for 26 years and have worked together for many of those.

KELLY PLEASE LET MARK SPEAK
LET THE POOR GUY FINISH A SENTENCE. ITS PAINFUL TO WATCH. THIS IS A DIFFICULT TRANSITION FOR ALOT OF US..

— lori d. (@loridee07) April 18, 2023

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Kelly Ripa (@kellyripa)

Embed from Getty Images

Photo credit: Instagram, Martin Sloan and Getty Images/Avalon Red

The funniest thing about the Carole and Michael Middleton’s Party Pieces business collapsing is the distinct lack of gossip and commentary about it in the British media. The Daily Mail, Tatler, The Telegraph, they’re all doing straight reporting about the situation around Party Pieces. There’s no commentator chiming in about how a potential bankruptcy for the future queen’s parents looks awful. There’s no royal biographer briefing the Mail about how the Middleton brand is going down the drain. All of those commentators are so focused on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s business dealings and putting the nastiest spin on Harry’s “paymasters,” meanwhile their future queen’s mother mismanaged what was supposed to be an eight-figure business into what looks like total insolvency. Nary a whiff of commentary about the fact that the Middletons will likely have to pay a “dowry” to offload the failing, debt-ridden business? Well, here’s more straight reporting – apparently, the Middletons need to offload PP in a hurry because two of their partners and financial backers pulled out rather suddenly. Holy sh-t.

Carole and Michael Middleton put their Party Pieces business up for sale after two of their three financial backers pulled out, it has emerged. Steven Bentwood, chief executive of parent company Party Pieces Holdings since 2019, and investor Darryl Eales resigned as directors in March, according to documents filed this week at Companies House. It was only after their departure that the Princess of Wales’s parents called in the consultancy Interpath to help them find a buyer for the company they founded in 1987.

Mr Bentwood, who previously built up his own lingerie company, and Mr Eales, a former chairman of Oxford United Football Club, and Erik Anderson, an American millionaire, all invested in Party Pieces when it became a public limited company four years ago. Now, only Mr Anderson remains as a director, together with Mr and Mrs Middleton.

It comes after reports that the Middletons are considering handing over a six-figure sum to a buyer in order to offload the business. Party Pieces lost £285,000 in 2021, taking its total deficit to £1.35 million, according to publicly available accounts.

A source close to the sale process confirmed that Mr Bentwood and Mr Eales had resigned as directors before Interplan was asked to give advice. The Middletons have asked Interplan to advise them on “options”, which include a sale or finding new investors.

The company is hoping it will receive a major boost from the Coronation – at which the Middletons are expected to be guests – by promoting a range of items for use at street parties.

Sky News reported this week that one of the leading contenders to buy the business is Club Green, one of its rivals, which is also a family-owned business selling party goods. Potential bidders have been told that Party Pieces has shown “some recent UK performance contraction during international expansion and focus on margins”. The Middletons are reportedly offering a six-figure “dowry” payment to sweeten any deal, with Sky quoting a source who said they were “trying to do the right thing for the business and its stakeholders”.

[From The Telegraph]

Um, is no one going to do a follow-up on WHY two of their business partners suddenly exited the business in March? Is no one going to do a follow-up on why Carole and Mike took on these business partners in 2019? Is no one going to ask if it’s tacky as f–k that the future queen’s gauche, bankrupt mother is hoping that her coronation invitation helps spur Party Pieces sales? I always thought that James Middleton was the black sheep of the family, the one with zero business sense, a well-connected grifter with a reverse Midas Touch. But no – the apple didn’t fall far from the grifter tree. Party Pieces has been a house of cards for a while. Sounds like those business partners just wised up to the extent of failing business this year. Good lord.

Also: how have Carole and Mike been funding their lavish lifestyle for years as their business went under? Does it have anything to do with that pot farm found adjacent to Middleton Manor?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Cover Images.

Since QEII passed away, there have been at least a dozen significant protests against the Windsors, mostly against King Charles. At this point, whenever Charles and Camilla turn up to a previously announced public event, there are at least 10-20 anti-monarchy protesters in the crowd. Recently, there have been even more protesters, like the Republic protesters outside the Commonwealth service in March, and outside the Royal Maundy service this month. Those are just the organized protests too – lone anti-monarchist activists have also disrupted Charles’s events by throwing eggs at him. All of which means that Charles is f–king terrified that the coronation will see large-scale protests and anti-monarchy demonstrations. The palace made a point of shortening the coronation procession from 4.5 miles (QEII’s procession) to 1.3 miles. A more limited space for Republic to stage what will probably be their biggest protest:

The leader of Britain’s largest anti-monarchist group says more than 1,350 people have pledged to protest during the coronation parade in May. Graham Smith, the head of Republic, said the demonstration would mark “the largest protest action” in the group’s 50-year history.

Republic activists will wear yellow T-shirts and wave yellow placards to create an “unmissable sea of yellow” along the procession route in central London, he said. When the newly crowned King passes in his gold stage coach, they plan to boo loudly and chant: “Not my King”. Most of the demonstration will be in Trafalgar Square but smaller groups of anti-monarchists will be dotted along other sections of the route.

Smith, 48, said activists would aim to arrive early in the morning to be as close to the barriers as possible. He stressed, however, that they were not planning any Extinction Rebellion-style stunts, because “it’s not a good look” and “doesn’t help the cause”. He added: “We want to make sure we have as many people as possible when Charles goes past, which we assume will be between 10 and 10:30am. You hope to be reasonably down near the front with a sea of placards. It’s a matter of standing out, making a very bold statement that there is a Republican movement and we’re not a nation of royalists. We have megaphones and an amplifier with a microphone. We should be unmissable.”

Smith said he had informed the Metropolitan Police of their plans. Anti-monarchists had been preparing for possible verbal clashes with royalists in the crowd, he added. He said he was not worried about arrests “because we’ve been very clear with the police what our plans are”. He added: “We’ve met with them twice and we have assurances about how they intend to police the event and the limits of their powers. We are aiming for a party atmosphere. We always try to engage with those people, keep it lighthearted. Some people get annoyed and upset, but most people accept the fact that people are allowed to protest. We’ve also got the police around if there’s any trouble.”

He added: “A lot of the people aren’t really staunch monarchists, they’re just there to see something that’s big or historic or whatever. We see them as potential republicans.”

Republic’s website invites potential protesters to sign a pledge, committing them to protesting in London or where they are based. Smith said that by 5:30 last night, 1,350 people had signed. “This will be the largest protest action we’ve done,” he said. “It won’t be the last.”

Demonstrations against the coronation are being planned in other parts of the UK. In Cardiff, the Not My King protest, organised by Campaign for a Welsh Republic, will meet at the Aneurin Bevan statue at 12.30pm, to march to Bute Park. The protest will be followed by what the group describes as a “big republican lunch”. In Glasgow, a march for independence is planned to run concurrently with the coronation services. A simultaneous protest will be held in Edinburgh at the National Monument of Scotland, with more than 250 people registering an interest in attending.

[From The Times]

As many have said before, it’s giving Trump inauguration. Remember the very first hours of Trump’s reign of terror, when he was having a hissy fit about crowd size? And then the next day, the anti-Trump Women’s March protests staged in DC and around the world were so much bigger. The problem for Charles is that his most vociferous “fans” and supporters really don’t care enough to come out for the coronation. The optics of this will be fascinating and it will be curious to see how the international media covers it. Ten bucks says that the demonstrations in Glasgow and Edinburgh will be huge too.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

Oh how I love how Bravo stars love to gossip and talk sh-t. Teddi Mellencamp, of the Real Housewives of Beverly Hills, just revealed on a radio show that she had a one-nighter with Matt Damon 20 years ago, when she was just 20-years-old herself. Apparently Teddi used a fake ID to get into a club specifically to meet Matt Damon. And her plan worked because she says she went home with him.

Tamra Judge is outing some of BFF Teddi Mellencamp’s sex life secrets — including one involving Matt Damon.

The “Two Ts in a Pod” co-hosts appeared on SiriusXM’s “Jeff Lewis Live” Tuesday, where Judge forced Mellencamp to open up about her one-night stand with the “Air” actor 20 years ago.

“She mentioned it on a podcast, and then went back and told producers, ‘Take that guy’s name out,’” Judge, 55, told Lewis. “And so now, I tell people, ‘If you guys wanna know, just DM and I’ll tell you who it is.’”

“She tells people on the DMs. I’m like, ‘Stop telling people,” Mellencamp, 41, joked. “I did not want to out this guy. Who knows?!”

However, Mellencamp went on to explain that she snuck into a club with a fake ID at just 20 years old to meet the hunky actor.

“He was probably 30 — ten years older,” the “Real Housewives of Beverly Hills” alum explained. “I only slept with him one night. He didn’t get my number.”

Although Mellencamp started off just giving hints about his identity — such as the fact his initials are MD and that he “has a very famous best friend” — a producer quickly guessed it was Damon, 52.

“I’ve already been coined a liar, I don’t need these kinds of things out and about,” she joked as Judge erupted into a fit of laughter.

Despite her one-night romance with Damon, Mellencamp went on to marry Edwin Arroyave and the pair welcomed four children.

[From Page Six]

It’s funny that Teddi tried to play coy with just the (very obvious) hints because she clearly wanted to share this. Honestly, it’s kind of a baller story, I can see why she wanted to brag about it. She snuck into the club with the aim of meeting her older celeb crush and then bedded him. She set a goal, made a plan, enacted the plan, and achieved her goal. Very resourceful. And Teddi said he didn’t get her number, well obviously. Matt was just trying to hookup. She says she’s been called a liar in the past, but whatever, I kind of believe this. People have one night stands all the time. Actors have one night stands all the time. So Matt Damon had one with a future reality star. Let’s just hope he took her to a nice hotel because it sounds like his home would not be in shape for unexpected guests.

Photos credit: Faye’s Vision/Cover Images, Xavier Collin/Image Press Agency/Avalon

I had the best time looking up all of these old photos of Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson at various Twilight premieres. Say what you will about those films, but K-Stew and R-Pattz had so much chemistry on and off-screen. The premiere photos are a whole journey, especially now that we’re more than a decade removed. The Twilight franchise really defined a whole generation and now a new generation will fall in love with sparkly vampires and lip-biters all over again. Yes, on the heels of the news about the Harry Potter series being remade, it looks like Lionsgate is looking to remake Twilight into a TV series.

The Twilight Saga is getting the television treatment as sources tell The Hollywood Reporter that a series version of author Stephenie Meyer’s best-selling book series is in early development via Lionsgate Television.

The Twilight TV series is in its infancy and does not yet have a network/platform or a writer as sources say the studio, which controls the rights to the franchise, plans to lead the development on the project before shopping the rights to the package. There is not yet a timeline for when the Twilight series will be taken out to potential buyers as Lionsgate first plans to find a writer to steer it.

Sources say author Meyer is expected to be involved in the television adaptation. Wyck Godfrey and former Lionsgate Motion Picture Group co-president Erik Feig, who during his tenure at Summit Entertainment bought the rights to the Twilight book series after Paramount Pictures passed, are both attached to exec produce the television take. Godfrey’s Temple Hill banner produced all five of the movies that Feig’s Summit distributed. The film franchise, which made stars of Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson and Taylor Lautner, collectively grossed more than $3.4 billion worldwide.

Twilight is a major piece of Lionsgate’s library. In 2017, five years after Breaking Dawn: Part 2 wrapped up Meyer’s film adaptation, Lionsgate CEO Jon Feltheimer told Wall Street during an earnings call that “there are a lot more stories to be told, and we’re ready to tell them when our creators are ready to tell those stories,” in reference to both Twilight and The Hunger Games franchises.

[From THR]

“There are a lot more stories to be told…” Then tell those stories? Why remake an already-beloved series, especially given that (in retrospect) they captured lightning in a bottle pairing Pattinson and Stewart? While I’m sure they could find two new young actors with chemistry, I’m not sure anyone could compete with the original? So why not just do… new characters within the Twilight universe or something? What’s going on with Stephenie Meyer? Or just hire a new writer to create stories in the same universe? My God.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, ‘Twight’ poster.

Will pregnant Rihanna attend the Met Gala this year? [LaineyGossip]
Spoilers for this week’s Succession – Marcia’s back & kicking ass! [Pajiba]
These Ariana Grande pics on the set of Wicked are confusing, given the promotional images. Will this movie actually be well-lit or not? [Dlisted]
Chris Pine wore the everloving f–k out of a tuxedo this weekend. [RCFA]
Brendan Hunt, aka Coach Beard, looks handsome in purple. [Go Fug Yourself]
Toni Collette looks great promoting that mafia comedy. [Tom & Lorenzo]
I did not know that Dax Shepard has this many tattoos. [Just Jared]
It’s absolutely wild to see child-labor protections get rolled back by Republican-controlled states. By “wild” I mean “shocking.” [Jezebel]
Jenna Ortega partied at Coachella. [Egotastic]
Most serial killers hold down normal jobs? I mean, it’s true. [Buzzfeed]
Kal Penn was on Sabrina the Teenage Witch! [Seriously OMG]
Christine Brown continues to live her best life post-Kody. [Starcasm]
Ron DeSantis keeps trying to battle with Disney. [Towleroad]

King Charles will be crowned on May 6th, the fourth birthday of his grandson Prince Archie. April, May and June are full of royal birthdays – Prince Louis’s birthday is coming up on Sunday, Princess Lilibet’s birthday is in June, and Princess Charlotte’s eighth birthday is on May 2nd, just days before the coronation. Apparently, Prince William and Kate are already making plans to skip part of the pre-Chubbly festivities to properly celebrate Charlotte’s birthday. Of course, their choices are being promoted as wholesome and family-oriented by the same British media which has spent the past week in a full meltdown that the Duchess of Sussex is choosing to stay in California to celebrate Archie’s birthday.

King Charles III’s coronation is fast approaching and it’s all stations go over at Buckingham Palace. From the guest-list being drawn up to the dress code being sent out and the royal roles being divvied up, there’s so much to prep ahead of the big day. But, it turns out that said big day has clashed with another important event in Prince William and Kate Middleton’s diary: Princess Charlotte’s birthday on 2 May.

Although the coronation itself falls on 6 May 2023, rehearsals for the event are taking place between 2 May and 5 May in the ballroom at Buckingham Palace, with the Prince and Princess of Wales expected to attend, given their important roles. But one insider has told OK! that the couple plan to ‘cut short’ their rehearsals so that they can spend time with their daughter on her birthday.

“William and Kate are very aware that it’s Princess Charlotte’s birthday on 2 May and don’t want it to get buried in coronation hype,” the source claimed. “They have ensured that Charlotte’s birthday will be celebrated properly during [the] coronation week.”

The insider went on: “Charlotte will be at school at Lambrook on that Tuesday so the plan is to collect her at the usual time and drive back to Windsor for a small party with her friends at Adelaide Cottage. It might even be a surprise party because staff have been told to keep it quiet.”

And Charlotte isn’t the only royal whose birthday falls around the coronation celebrations, with the insider making it known that Charles’ other grandchildren will not miss out. “Prince Louis has his birthday on 23 April, but it doesn’t conflict with any coronation events so will be celebrated as usual. He’ll be turning 5 this year,” the source said.

[From Yahoo UK]

“They have ensured that Charlotte’s birthday will be celebrated properly during [the] coronation week.” Qwhite. This just angers me all over again, and I’ve grown convinced that Charles and his staff purposefully chose Archie’s birthday for the coronation. Charles is literally beefing with a child over who gets more attention, and Charles is simultaneously acting spiteful towards the entire Sussex family, acting as if it’s some egregious act that Meghan and Harry would have qualms about missing their only son’s birthday. Anyway, I hope we get endless columns about how rude and pathetic Kate and William are for skipping out on Chubbly rehearsals to celebrate Charlotte’s b-day.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images, Backgrid.

Robert Jobson’s latest royal book, Our King, has been widely and gleefully excerpted in the UK and America. In addition to being one of the most vile royal commentators, Jobson is pretty much devoted to spreading gossip straight from King Charles, Queen Camilla and their people. I had my doubts about that years ago, but I was wrong – everything coming out of Jobson’s mouth is explicitly or implicitly from C&C. Meaning, Charles and Camilla definitely want to push the Princess of Wales back, and the knives are out. It feels like C&C want to blame the larger Sussexit fallout on Kate in particular. Which is fascinating. But we shouldn’t sleep on the fact that Jobson also got some briefings about how Prince William is a short-tempered, impatient nutcase.

Prince William is not always the easiest person to work with, according to a new royal book.

“He can be difficult,” a senior royal household figure told author Robert Jobson for his recently released biography, “Our King: Charles III: The Man and the Monarch Revealed.“

“He is a driven person and that can make him impatient,” the source continued about the newly anointed Prince of Wales, 40.

The insider compared him to King Charles, 74, who apparently possesses more patience.

“That can make William short-tempered when dealing with Charles,” they added. “The Boss (Charles) has a temper, too, but it does not go on and on. He can get frustrated and flare up and then, in an instant, it is forgotten about. With William, it is rarely forgotten.”

[From Page Six]

Something interesting about Robert Jobson is that he churned out a biography of William last year, and he used much stronger language to describe William. In that book (William at 40), Jobson detailed how William can be “offhand and volatile” and that William has always lacked deference to his father, and that William was constantly losing his mind and throwing screaming tantrums in front of Charles and AT Charles. Jobson also reported in that book that everyone around William knows that he has a “notably short fuse” and he regularly screams at staff. But, you know, the Black duchess sent a jet-lagged email. Anyway… the Prince of Wales is “difficult.” A very Difficult Diva, always engorged with incandescent rage, always flying off the handle, always screaming and shrieking at everyone and everything. Oh, and he’s violent too.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Cover Images.

Every few weeks, we’ve been getting these stories and they’re one of my favorite things of the year: British aristocrats are super-salty about not being invited to King Charles’s coronation. The Earl of Fancybreeches and the Duke of Trousersnape have truly been sending strongly-worded parchments to the palace, demanding their Chubbly invite posthaste. They’re throwing tantrums about it in the media, they’re inundating the Duke of Norfolk with rage-emails and irate phone calls. It’s glorious, but it does beg the question: why didn’t Charles prioritize the aristocracy for invites? There’s a lot of talk about fewer seats, but that hasn’t stopped Charles from inviting foreign heads of state and Camilla’s entire f–king extended family? Surely Lord Toadscrotum is *as* important?? Well, interestingly enough, it looks like the king massively snubbed all of the “grandest aristocrats” – most of the 24 non-royal dukes.

The Coronation, now just three weeks away, will be seen by many as a display of splendid pageantry and tradition – and by critics as a blast of flummery and fanfare. But, to King Charles, it evidently represents a unique chance to begin a new era – one quite distinct from that of his late mother, Queen Elizabeth. Nowhere, I can reveal, will this be more starkly apparent than in the exclusion from the service in Westminster Abbey of most of the grandest aristocrats in the land, along with almost all their fellow hereditary peers. Even most of the 24 non-royal dukes – the most senior rank in the peerage – are not exempt from the cull, despite the fact that one of their number, the Duke of Norfolk, is orchestrating every detail of the Coronation in his role as Earl Marshal.

The Duke of Rutland, who lives in one wing of his 365-room family seat, Belvoir Castle in Leicestershire, while his wife, Emma, lives in another, is one of the many dismayed and bewildered by their exclusion. ‘I have not been asked,’ he tells me, saying that he does ‘not really understand’ why. ‘It has been families like mine that have supported the Royal Family over 1,000 years or thereabouts,’ adds the Duke, who has two sons and three lively daughters, Lady Violet, Lady Alice and Lady Eliza Manners.

But not only did peers attend coronations, they were required to ‘give the kiss of homage and touch the Crown’ – a vestige of feudal allegiance to the monarch, for whom, it was implied, they would fight and, if necessary, die on the field of battle. At Queen Elizabeth’s coronation, a royal duke, Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh, took off his coronet, ascended the steps of the throne, knelt before the Queen, placed his hands between hers and ‘pronounced his words of homage’. He was followed by two more royal dukes, the Dukes of Gloucester and Kent.

Then it was the turn of the senior peer of each ‘degree’ – the duke, marquess, earl, viscount and baron with the oldest titles. As they ‘paid homage in like manner’, their fellow peers of the respective ‘degree’, knelt in their places in the Abbey, removed their coronets, and also said their words of homage. A Buckingham Palace spokesman declines to comment, but a royal source insists that ‘a good representation of non-royal dukes will be in attendance’.

The Duke of Rutland will presumably console himself at Belvoir, where a collection of his family’s coronation robes is on display. Perhaps the disappointment will be even more acute for the Duke of Somerset. ‘He was sprucing up the family state coach,’ a chum tells me, adding that the Duke had entertained the idea of arriving in the Abbey in it. ‘He thought he might be invited, even if not all the dukes were, because his is the second oldest dukedom after Norfolk’s.’ Alas, it appears that the Duke of Somerset, whose title was created in 1547, is among those who have been discarded. After explaining to me a few weeks ago that he didn’t want to comment at ‘this stage’, he now declines to say anything at all.

Perhaps he should perk himself up by having a word with Robin Devereux, 19th Viscount Hereford, who, as premier viscount, might have expected to ‘pay homage’ on behalf of his fellow viscounts. He, too, declines to comment, but has, apparently, taken his exclusion in good heart. ‘He says he’s still waiting for his invitation,’ I’m told. ‘But he’s not upset about it. He knows that this is a new era.’

[From The Daily Mail]

On one side, I actually feel bad for these victims of a very shallow gene pool – they’ve lived their entire lives believing that they are important because of their fancy titles, that they are necessary to the functioning of the British social order, that they must pledge themselves to the king. Only for the king to tell them “don’t come, you’re not important.” Don’t you understand how poignant it is that the Duke of Somerset was sprucing up his state coach?!? On the other side, these people are absurd and this way of life cannot continue, holy smokes. I am stuck on the fact that Charles really does seem to not be afraid of aristo backlash early in his reign. I wonder if that’s a mistake?

PS… It also feels notable that Charles is snubbing all of these “important” non-royal dukes, all while he cozies up the Marquess of Cholmondeley, David Rocksavage. A “marquess” isn’t as important as a duke, and yet Charles has made a point of including David and Rose’s son as a page and appointing David as his Lord-in-Waiting. Curious.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Instar and Cover Images.