I’m a royal expert – there are many historical reasons why King Charles should not invite Harry to the Coronation
THE Coronation of King Charles on May 6 is HIS moment of destiny – a joyous moment to celebrate our new monarch.
This symbolic formality is also a state occasion paid for by the taxpayers of this country.
Although it will be watched by millions on TV and cheered by those who line the streets, it is not a royal wedding.
It is for us, the monarch’s subjects — not for the Royal Family.
Officially, the Palace have not said if Harry and Meghan — the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, or H & M — will come.
Nor has Harry, Harold, Henry or whatever the man formerly known as Prince calls himself these days.
READ MORE ON PRINCE HARRY
All he says is he wants his brother Willy and dad the King back, and the “ball is in their court”.
Again, he has managed to make something that isn’t about him all about him.
We are the only country in Europe that still practises royal coronations.
Royal houses in Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands have never done one and they scrapped them in Denmark, Norway and Sweden well over a century ago. Spain has seen no coronation since medieval times.
Most read in Fabulous
For royal weddings, the couple pick the guest list — as despite all the hullabaloo, it is technically a private affair.
But the Coronation absolutely is not. It is a ceremony for the people, paid for by the people.
The King may have views on who should be there, and the form of the service, but it is his Government who will have the ultimate control over who is invited, because the Government is footing the bill.
And even with claims that our King, mindful of the cost-of-living crisis, wants to scale back the ceremony, it will still cost a small fortune.
The Queen’s iconic Coronation 70 years ago cost a whopping £1.57million, which in today’s money would be about £46million.
This “cost-of-living” Coronation won’t cost anywhere near that figure, as the King and Government agree it should be shorter, smaller and with more representatives of community groups and faiths present — but overall with fewer people coming, limited to around 2,000.
Royal dukes — such as William (who is Duke of Cambridge and Cornwall as well as Prince of Wales), Andrew (York) who is no longer a working royal, and Kent and Gloucester — won’t be expected to kneel before King Charles and swear their loyalty to him.
So why should the Duke of Entitlement — Harry — think the King should come begging for him to attend.
It is Charles’ big moment.
Why should his ceremony, which will be watched by the world, have the spotlight shifted to his errant, blabbermouth son — and his wife, Meghan?
It would turn a solemn occasion — when the established Church of England anoint their Supreme Governor and confirm him as monarch — into a circus.
It is sacred and shouldn’t be turned into just another episode of Harry and Meghan’s version of The Kardashians.
The Coronation service ends with a procession, and since the 20th century it has been traditional for the royals to appear later on the balcony of the Palace before attending a banquet there.
Charles is, of course, already confirmed as King.
From the moment the late Queen Elizabeth II died, under the old common law rex nun-quam moritur — Latin for the King never dies — he was monarch. But during the most fragile period for the monarch — the period of mourning and transition — a new monarch is at his or her most vulnerable, as they establish themselves.
Charles has done well. He steadied the ship and his personal ratings have been at an all-time high, unlike his errant second son whose popularity ratings in the UK have nosedived over his trashing of his family.
If Harry and Meghan rock up at Westminster Abbey — with no doubt a Netflix crew lurking in case they do another series — it will all be about them.
How are they interacting with Willy and Catherine? Is Camilla looking daggers at Harry? Who is going to make who cry?
The Coronation has to be above that.
It is essentially a Christian service where the Sovereign is anointed with holy oil, and gets the Crown as well as other royal insignia, from the clergy.
‘Not place to reconcile’
I expect those around Charles don’t want Harry and Meghan there.
Like Sun readers, they probably think that, after the way he has trashed his family, the institution and his country, this would be inappropriate.
There is precedent, too.
Ahead of the Coronation of Queen Elizabeth II in 1953 the ex-King, Edward VIII, published his controversial memoir — A King’s Story: The Memoirs of HRH The Duke of Windsor.
It put the Queen and her Government in a difficult position.
While the “exiled” Duke was permitted to attend younger brother George VI’s state funeral in 1952, he was effectively banned from the Coronation — by Prime Minister Winston Churchill.
Emphasising that the Queen’s Coronation was a state occasion, Churchill — who had once been a great supporter of Edward — told the King who was never crowned that he was not welcome at the Abbey.
As a result, he didn’t come.
READ MORE SUN STORIES
No matter how much Charles — a kind man who loves both his sons — must be torn, a state event like his Coronation is NOT the place for a reconciliation with his “darling boy”.
That, if it happens, has to be done in private — if and only if Harry grasps what the word private means.