Coronation of British Monarchs


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Both Princess Elizabeth (then eleven) and Princess Margaret (7) wore small gold coronets when they attended the Coronation of their father in 1937. Wonder what happened to these pieces? If Charlotte is of a similar age when her grandfather (or father) is crowned she may wear some sort of small coronet, though I doubt it!
 
Good question Curryong. I wonder if it is on display in the Tower of London or stashed in a vault. Since Charles didn't wear one at his mother's coronation this might be a tradition that has ended in the BRF.
 
:previous: I went to the Tower of London last summer and I don't remember seeing (the then) Princess Elizabeth and Princess Margaret's coronets.

As TLLK pointed out, Prince Charles didn't wear a coronet at HM's coronation in 1953, so perhaps this tradition has indeed finished for the BRF, though having said that, Charles was younger than the his mother and her sister were when they wore their coronets at their father's coronation.
 
The British coronation service is pretty long. Charles didn't stay for the whole thing and Anne wasn't taken to it at all. Both Elizabeth and Margaret had fur trimmed robes to go with their coronets. Charles and Anne were just in a ruffled shirt/pant outfit and little dress. I can't image the trend reversing with George and Charlotte getting super dressed up with robes and coronets at Charles's especially with the move away in the BRF from tiara wearing other than a handful of state occasions.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
The British coronation service is pretty long. Charles didn't stay for the whole thing and Anne wasn't taken to it at all. Both Elizabeth and Margaret had fur trimmed robes to go with their coronets. Charles and Anne were just in a ruffled shirt/pant outfit and little dress. I can't image the trend reversing with George and Charlotte getting super dressed up with robes and coronets at Charles's especially with the move away in the BRF from tiara wearing other than a handful of state occasions.

I'm on the fence about this. On one hand, it would make sense that Charles' coronation reflect the general atmosphere that the British royal family now tends to show with very few occasions where the full bling come out but also, as there hasn't been a coronation since 1953, it will be a grand occasion with all the traditions and pomp and circumstance that can be mustered. If we thought that the audience for Will and Kate's wedding was huge, I think the audience globally for the coronation of a new British monarch will be monumental. I, for one, will be glued to the TV or my computer screen watching every minute of it.

How George and Charlotte are dressed and if they attend, I imagine it would primarily be based on what ages they are when the time comes. I think also that it is very likely that the robes and the coronets that have been used previously are tucked away safely in storage somewhere and if need be, will be taken out and used again.
 
I'm on the fence about this. On one hand, it would make sense that Charles' coronation reflect the general atmosphere that the British royal family now tends to show with very few occasions where the full bling come out but also, as there hasn't been a coronation since 1953, it will be a grand occasion with all the traditions and pomp and circumstance that can be mustered. If we thought that the audience for Will and Kate's wedding was huge, I think the audience globally for the coronation of a new British monarch will be monumental. I, for one, will be glued to the TV or my computer screen watching every minute of it.

How George and Charlotte are dressed and if they attend, I imagine it would primarily be based on what ages they are when the time comes. I think also that it is very likely that the robes and the coronets that have been used previously are tucked away safely in storage somewhere and if need be, will be taken out and used again.
If there is a Coronation. Lets assume nothing. Remember QE II was never meant to be monarch. It would be a shocking turn of events but in this world, anything is possible.
 
You make a good, valid point there. Who knows what the future will bring. :D
 
Apparently the coronets used for Princess Elizabeth and Princess Margaret were just fantasy coronets in mediaeval style and specially commissioned for this event. They do not have any historic relevance and were just meant "to dress up" as the two Princesses were no Peers at all and shoud -normally- not wear anything. I can not imagine that anno 2015 or later Prince George and Princess Charlotte will still wear those fantasy crowns which refer to nothing. At least the crowns of the Duke of Norfolk, or the Marquess of Winchester, or the Earl of Shrewsbury at least refer to centuries and centuries old peerages. These fake crowns only add to the feeling "it is just silly theatre, folks". I would keep it pure and not dress it up.
 
Last edited:
Please forgive me if I am going off topic but the whole making things up for the sake of pageantry was arguably a large part of PC's investiture as Prince of Wales was it not?

You make a good, valid point there. Who knows what the future will bring. :D
Thank you Osipi and may I say how much I like your various smileys. Not that I don't enjoy your informative post's as well...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Please forgive me if I am going off topic but the whole making things up for the sake of pageantry was arguably a large part of PC's investiture as Prince of Wales was it not?

Índeed, I can not imagine the new King to invest the new Prince of Wales with such newly invented theatre again.
 
One sees it now and it looks so set in the sixties, so of its time and that crown? But Royalty is about Pageantry is it not?
 
PoW investiture is a made up thing that only has been done for Edward and Charles the last 2 PoWs. No set formula. Charles's was basically a made for TV event designed by Lord Snowdon

The coronation service goes back a 1000 years. The service itself hasn't been changed since 1689.

It's safe to say when Charles is crowned (assuming no doomsday scenario) the grandkids aren't going to be adults. The BRF typically doesn't take really young kids to church services and the coronation is longer than a wedding or funeral would be. So W&K would have to decide if the kids can't handle sitting in the royal box. There is a coronet design for the children of the heir apparent but would they want to make them use it in the part after the crowning when the peers don their coronets.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
PoW investiture is a made up thing that only has been done for Edward and Charles the last 2 PoWs. No set formula. Charles's was basically a made for TV event designed by Lord Snowdon

The coronation service goes back a 1000 years. The service itself hasn't been changed since 1689.

It's safe to say when Charles is crowned (assuming no doomsday scenario) the grandkids aren't going to be adults. The BRF typically doesn't take really young kids to church services and the coronation is longer than a wedding or funeral would be. So W&K would have to decide if the kids can't handle sitting in the royal box. There is a coronet design for the children of the heir apparent but would they want to make them use it in the part after the crowning when the peers don their coronets.
Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Exactly - there are specific coronets for the heir apparent, his (and now her) children, other children of a sovereign, and grandchildren of a sovereign - peers or not. Potential royal coronet wearers for Charles's coronation would be William, George and Charlotte (depending on their ages), Harry, Andrew, Beatrice, Eugenie, Anne, Peter, Zara, Louise, James, Edward, Dukes of Gloucester and Kent (if he's still alive, if not, his son will as an "ordinary" duke) Prince Michael, and Princess Alexandra - assuming the Queen's cousins are still alive of course. I'm not sure, but I believe that Catherine, Sophie, Birgitte, Katharine Kent and Marie-Christine would also be entitled as wives, as would the future Princess Harry.
 
One sees it now and it looks so set in the sixties, so of its time and that crown? But Royalty is about Pageantry is it not?

Probably they would not use this Crown for William. The one for Charles was made specailly for him as the ral üprince of Wales cvoronet was still with the Duke of Windsor.
 
Appropriate Age to Wear Jewellery

Exactly - there are specific coronets for the heir apparent, his (and now her) children, other children of a sovereign, and grandchildren of a sovereign - peers or not. Potential royal coronet wearers for Charles's coronation would be William, George and Charlotte (depending on their ages), Harry, Andrew, Beatrice, Eugenie, Anne, Peter, Zara, Louise, James, Edward, Dukes of Gloucester and Kent (if he's still alive, if not, his son will as an "ordinary" duke) Prince Michael, and Princess Alexandra - assuming the Queen's cousins are still alive of course. I'm not sure, but I believe that Catherine, Sophie, Birgitte, Katharine Kent and Marie-Christine would also be entitled as wives, as would the future Princess Harry.


The article I read had a coronet for the heir-apparent, children of the heir apparent, children of the other sons of the sovereign, grandchildren of the sovereign.

There is a difference of one word between what you and I wrote- a vs the. If it's the , Charles is the sovereign in this discussion and the coronets are limited to Anne, Andrew and Edwards as siblings and then W and H's families.

If a is right, it adds Peter, Zara, Bea, Eugenie, Louise, James, David Linley, Sarah Chatto, DoGloucester, DoKent, Michael of Kent, Alexandra of Kent

The 2 Dukes would had a coronet as dukes.

Which is right?


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
Usually (adult) Princes of the blood royal have a coronet. And of course the Peers.
 
Appropriate Age to Wear Jewellery

Granted, Peter and Zara are grandchildren of a sovereign; however, they are untitled "commoners." Would they still wear coronets? I don't believe they have a right to bear a coronet of any rank on their coats of arms.
 
Last edited:
Granted, Peter and Zara are grandchildren of a sovereign; however, they are untitled "commoners." Would they still wear coronets? I don't believe they have a right to bear a coronet of any rank on their coats of arms.

They are no Princes of the Blood Royal and they no Peers of the Realm. So most likely they will wear nothing at the Coronation. The coronets worn by Princes and Peers are derived from their Coat of Arms.

Look at this picture.

From the left to the right:

A Baron (plain silver gilded circlet with six silver balls)

A Marquess (four golden strawberry leaves alternate with four silver balls)

A Duke (eight golden strawberry leaves)

An Earl (eight rays with silver balls with golden stawberry leaves in between)

A Viscount (sixteen silver balls closely set on a circlet)

:flowers:
 
Actually I wonder if coronets and peer's robes will still be used at all at the next coronation. After all it is more than 60 years since the last coronation, and the pomp and circumstance of monarchy has considerably altered during that period. The role of British peers has quite changed also. So I wouldn't be surprised if the coronets and robes will fall prey to the modernization of the coronation ceremony. Maybe there won’t even be tiaras and long gowns, though I certainly do not hope so.
 
I hope that the coronation is equal to that of Elizabeth II.

Who were the peers of the realm at the coronation of Elizabeth II?
 
Some hereditary peers by virtue of the their office will be involved. The Duke of Norfolk as the Earl Marshal and Hereditary Marshal of England will oversee many aspects of the coronation.

The Marquess of Cholmondeley as The Lord Great Chamberlain, has charge over the Palace of Westminster and will certainly be there.

Coronets and peer's robes would look magnificent

I think each rank of the peerage will have some representatives in full robes as will life peers.

There are only 24 dukes left so this may be their last 'kick at the can' if you will.
 
Last edited:
I believe the next Coronation will reflect on the previous Coronation of 53.
 
I believe the next Coronation will reflect on the previous Coronation of 53.

I really hope it is done up in all the grandeur and splendor that the Queen's coronation was done in. After 62 years, it will be something the majority of UK citizens and global watchers have never seen. Its an actual coronation where the official state regalia is used and the King will actually be crowned rather than just have a crown on display as some other countries have done. Charles is very much a traditionalist and I would imagine he would want things to be as they've been for centuries. No one does pomp and pageantry like the British.

Perhaps a more modern coronation could come into being with the coronation of William. Although its very possible, I don't think William will have such a long wait as his father has had and the grand coronation of Charles will still be remembered by a good percentage of the world.
 
One reason why I suspect it won't be as grand is that Westminster Abbey was closed to the public for six months to prepare it for the coronation - to put in all the extra seating etc. I don't see them closing the Abbey for that length of time which would mean fewer guests at the ceremony.


I am not sure it will be anything like 1953 - certainly it will be simpler. One reason will be Charles' age. He will probably be in his late 70s at the time and so the ceremony will need to be shortened for him so he can simply survive it - it would be awful if he couldn't last through the ceremony due to health issues. The Queen was a young woman in her 20s while her son will be in his 70s and he isn't as fit now as he was even 10 years ago. Camilla's health will also be a factor as she also has to make it through the ceremony - whether she is going to be crowned as Queen or simply take the title of Princess Consort she still has to be there for the entire ceremony.
 
Granted, Peter and Zara are grandchildren of a sovereign; however, they are untitled "commoners." Would they still wear coronets? I don't believe they have a right to bear a coronet of any rank on their coats of arms.

Does that include Louise and James too?
 
The service itself hasn't changed since the 1600s. A 70 something Charles is in better health than a 61 Edward VII post appendix surgery. The King and Queen are sitting through most of the service. Probably the end procession with the St Edwards Crown out is the most difficult. There would be train bearers for the King. Plus if Camilla go ahead with the Princess Consort would she even need to be anointed and crown?

I can the audience in the Abbey being changed- more diverse people from the UK and commonwealth then peers in robes. Nominated for their good deeds. That sort of thing. If the Abbey, which is funded by visitors, isn't closed to expand the seating, then maybe there is a quicker turnaround between ascension and crowing.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
The formal 'mourning' period is one year. The Coronation is held in summer. That is why they have had up to 18 months or so from accession to Coronation a few times - otherwise the women would have to be in mourning colours and even the music would have to reflect that. or the coronation would be in winter.


Charles at say 78 will still be less fit than he is now and the service does go for hours and he has to move around with a very heavy robe on, even with pages to carry it, it still weighs a lot on the shoulders etc.


Edward VII's service is now the one that is followed with only the five senior peers - other than family and the Archbishops swearing allegiance rather than every peer - and that is a very important part of the ceremony. Take the peers out of it and it can be cut back quite a lot. The coronation was not just about crowing the new monarch but having the peers swear personal allegiance to the new monarch. It wasn't really for the 'ordinary' person in the street although now it is for a range of different reasons.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps Charles isn't person being crowned? I wonder if the Queen follows the Queen Mum's path and lives to say 98 and Charles is 76 when he becomes King but is in poor health himself. Would they go ahead with a coronation within a 2 yr window or not bother with it- sort of what happened with the King is a child. They wait for him to grow up a bit. Would they not do the coronation and just wait for William? Charles would be King but not crowned.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
No.


Just because Charles will be the oldest person to be crowned if he is King he will be crowned.


They only ways Charles isn't crowned is if he doesn't become King or if he is already mentally incapacitated and their is a regency in place during his reign.
 
Back
Top Bottom