King Charles’ crowning | Of Camilla, disputed diamonds and other coronation firsts

Yes, it was a very different coronation in London in May 2023. At the previous such ceremony in June 1953 the monarch was young: just 27. And Britain’s Prime Minister was old: 78. In 2023, the monarch is old: soon to be 75. And Britain’s PM is young: just 42. More significantly (for many) the PM in 1953 was Winston Churchill, the man who vigorously opposed the independence of India all his life. And the PM in 2023 is Rishi Sunak, a Briton of Indian origin. In 1953—barely six years after a hard won independence, India’s first PM happily attended the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II, whose ancestors and countrymen subjugated and exploited India for centuries. In fact, he even candidly commented on how orderly the crowds were, unlike back home in India. In 2023, there was no question of India’s 14th PM or the President attending the coronation. Instead, the Vice President represented the Commonwealth’s largest nation. Some things remained unchanged. The King’s greying head was adorned with the golden Crown of St Edward and he was handed the golden Orb and two Sceptres, one of which contains the 530.2 carats Great Star of Africa (also called the Cullinan I), still the world’s largest clear cut diamond. And when the King left Westminster Abbey, he was wearing the equally glittering Imperial State Crown, which boasts the 317 carat Cullinan II among 3,000-odd other gems. But some things did change. The Queen Consort’s crown was traditionally newly made for each coronation and included the Kohinoor. Queen Mary (Charles’ great grandmother) had one made with the diamond for her 1911 coronation as consort of George V. It was also put in Queen Elizabeth’s new topper when she was crowned as King George VI’s consort in 1937. But no new crown was made this time for Queen Camilla: she wore Queen Mary’s, minus the Kohinoor. And that is mainly because India has made its annoyance very clear this time. In 1937 when Queen Elizabeth was crowned as consort, India was a British colony and its opinion on the Kohinoor would not have been considered at all. In 1953, the trappings of Empire were fraying but still there, so no one raised even a murmur when she wore it again, this time as the Queen Mother. It is unlikely PM Jawaharlal Nehru conveyed India’s displeasure to anyone at the Abbey. This time, the royal family and Britain were more mindful of India’s sentiments. After all, India has now surpassed Britain as the world’s fifth largest economy and it happens to be the most populous member of the Commonwealth, which King Charles now heads. But the same consideration was not extended to South Africa, which has also been protesting about Britain’s appropriation of the huge Cullinan diamond mined there and “presented” to George V in 1905. All five egg sized major sections of the single giant rough diamond were worn by Charles and Camilla—I and II by him, and III, IV and V by her. No doubt a lot of the other diamonds in the state jewels they both wore can trace their roots to India and the other colonies. In that sense, the new King remains tied to the past; if he starts returning gems on request, most Crown Jewels would be stripped of their glitter. What would tourist gawp at then in the Tower of London? Interestingly, Camilla did wear the Coronation Necklace made for Queen Victoria in 1858, which was also worn by Queen Elizabeth II in 1953. Dangling from a string of 26 large diamonds is the giant 22.48-carat Lahore Diamond which, like the Kohinoor, belonged to Maharaja Ranjit Singh and was “presented” to Victoria, after the British victory over Punjab. Even the matching earrings are the diamonds that flanked the Kohinoor when it was set in an Indian style armlet. As the Lahore diamond is only about one-fourth the size of the Kohinoor and does not have the same legendary aura, the British authorities probably thought it was okay to trot out this necklace in 2023 as it was in 1953. They must be confident that India will not add this stone to the Must Be Returned By Britain list. Or maybe they reckon that a possible counter-claim from Pakistan because of its name (Lahore) will ensure a status quo for the foreseeable future. But all this does not take away from the fact that the coronation of 2023 was markedly different from 1953—very self-consciously so in some aspects. Queen Camilla as the first divorcee to become queen and be crowned was the most remarkable change. Had the Church of England relented on this issue earlier, the King may never have married Lady Diana Spencer and saved a lot of unhappiness all round. But the commentators stuck to the more obvious changes. The plethora of non-white participants in the ancient ceremony, women playing key roles, not to mention a Black gospel choir swaying in the soaring nave of Westminster Abbey, were definitely not seen (or even contemplated) in 1953. And importantly for the British, the presence of “ordinary people” rather than just the aristocracy marked a change, as did the presence of leaders of different faiths including even the miniscule Baha’i and Zoroastrian communities. Most people would be forgiven for forgetting or not realising that Britain is still overwhelmingly white—over 87 per cent in all: over 95 per cent in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales, over 80 per cent in England. But the sheer number of important participants from minority ethnicities was striking. The acknowledgement of today’s “blended families” via the inclusion of Queen Camilla’s non-royal grandchildren in the age-old ceremony was also part of this exposition of New Britain. The music—arguably the most glorious and uplifting facet of the ceremony—was unambiguously and agelessly British, European and very Christian; the choristers and musicians, though, were not necessarily so. Amid boys and girls, men and women of clearly diverse ethnicities and colourings who comprised the music contingent was a bespectacled Sikh! And, of course, the Reading was perfectly delivered by Britain’s first non-white PM, himself a practising Hindu. It is universally acknowledged that no one does pomp and pageantry better than the British; that is what always draws the crowds—tourists and locals. The Gold State Coach and other anachronistic modes of transport bearing Royal Family members in their coronation finery (though tiaras were given a miss), buglers heralding parts of the ceremony, grandly caparisoned horsemen and marching Red Coats ensured that Old Britain was not entirely forsaken in 2023. The reality check, of course, is that Britain is now a small (and diminishing) island country of 67 million people. Its remaining “territories and realms” are mostly islands too. The countries where he is still head of state have rising republican movements. King Charles’s succession to the leadership of the Commonwealth was a question mark during his mother’s reign; the same uncertainty will remain for his son and more so, his grandson. A lot has changed in 70 years. That Britain has retained this custom of a formal coronation from its glory days as a major European and world power seems incongruous to many today. After all, none of their fellow crowned heads of Europe have such arcane ceremonies although Asian monarchies retain their formalities. But the sight of the King divested of ermine and robes and sitting in a simple shirt behind a screen at the altar to be privately anointed with holy oil provided the raison d’etre. It was a reminder to Britain’s King, Queen and all present there of spirituality, humility and mortality, qualities that are easy to forget for those living in the secluded world of royal privilege. Even for those watching elsewhere round the world, it’s a reminder of the onerous responsibility that the monarch takes on in the presence of his God. Soon to turn 75, Charles III has already seen Britain move from Churchill to Sunak. The future looks interesting indeed! The author is a freelance writer. Views expressed are personal. Read all the  Latest News ,  Trending News ,  Cricket News ,  Bollywood News , India News  and  Entertainment News  here. Follow us on  Facebook,  Twitter and  Instagram.