Far from being on their uppers, Britain's upper classes still hold wealth and power

Despite vastly increased competition from other social groups, the gentry remain as influential in this century as they ever were

- Martha Gill

Of all the groups of elites that have been challenged, confronted and scrutinised in recent years – bankers, celebrities, Etonians, metropolitan dinner partygoers, and one-percenters - there is one category that always seems to slip by unnoticed: aristocrats.

Aristocrats rarely become the focus of public or activist ire, at least in modern times. Instead they are often treated with a sort of affectionate nostalgia. This is reflected in popular culture, which mostly places them in period dramas. Bridgerton, Downton Abbey and The Crown were all smash-hits.

The upper crust is merged, on our screens and in our minds, with our history and heritage - National Trust homes, rolling countryside - and consigned firmly to the past. Nowadays, if we think of them at all, we perhaps imagine a marginal group eating baked beans in their mouldering dining rooms, surrounded by buckets to catch the drips from cracked stucco ceilings. But this is not quite true.

The fortunes of aristocrats may have declined since their ruling days. But they have also maintained astonishing wealth and influence. This group has, in the last century, been joined by others at the top, but it has not resigned its elite status.

Let's start with money. Almost a third of the land in England and Wales belongs to the aristocracy; a list of major landowners in the 1800s would contain names familiar to us today. The Duke of Westminster still owns vast estates in Cheshire and Lancashire, as well as large chunks of London's Mayfair and Belgravia. Cadogan Square, Sloane Street and King's Road still belong to Earl Cadogan.