On Wednesday, news broke that Prince Harry would attend the King's coronation in London without his wife, Meghan Markle. This decision has raised questions, and HELLO!'s royal editor, Emily Nash, weighed in on why the couple made this choice.
According to Emily, one factor could be that the couple did not want to bring their children on such a long journey. The scrutiny that the family would face if they were present may also have been a consideration for Harry, who may want to protect his family's privacy.
In addition, Prince Archie's fourth birthday falls on coronation day. Emily suggested that Harry may feel sad about missing his son's milestone, but he understands the importance of supporting his father, the King, on this historic occasion.
While it is not yet confirmed what role Harry will play in the ceremony, it is unlikely that he will take part in the service. Blood princes traditionally have a specific role in coronation proceedings, such as paying homage to the monarch and swearing allegiance. However, Emily thinks that Harry will attend the ceremony without a specific role.
Despite this, Emily explained that Harry's attendance alone is significant. His willingness to be present, especially after the difficulties that his family has faced, is a big moment.
Royal family members are expected to participate in the royal procession and appear on the balcony of Buckingham Palace during the historic day. The coronation is an important event for both the country and the King personally.
In conclusion, the decision for Meghan Markle to remain in California while Prince Harry attends the King's coronation in London may have been influenced by the couple's desire to protect their family's privacy and avoid scrutiny. Harry's attendance alone is significant, and his willingness to support his father is a big moment after the difficulties that his family has faced. The coronation is a historic event for the country and the King personally, and royal family members are expected to participate in the ceremony.