Meghan is said to be setting firm conditions — no UK return and no reconciliation without a public apology first.

After stepping down from their roles as senior working royals in early 2020, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have maintained a complicated and often tense relationship with the British monarchy. What began as a dramatic departure quickly evolved into a series of public interviews, documentaries, and ultimately Harry’s memoir Spare, all of which deepened the rift between the Sussexes and senior members of the Royal Family. By the time King Charles III officially ascended the throne following the death of Queen Elizabeth II in September 2022, the family dynamic was already fragile. The coronation, long planned under the codename “Operation Gold Orb,” was meant to signal stability, continuity, and a modernized monarchy — yet it unfolded against a backdrop of unresolved personal tensions.

Charles was formally proclaimed sovereign shortly after the Queen’s passing, and preparations accelerated for his historic coronation at Westminster Abbey. Unlike his mother’s lavish 1953 ceremony, this coronation was described by insiders as more streamlined and reflective of a changed world. The King was said to be mindful of economic realities and public sentiment, opting for a ceremony that balanced tradition with restraint. Still, as the date approached, one question dominated headlines: would Harry and Meghan attend?

Speculation intensified following the January 2023 release of Spare, in which Harry offered deeply personal accounts of his relationship with his father and his brother, Prince William. In interviews promoting the book, Harry spoke candidly about sibling rivalry, describing William as his “archnemesis” and referencing the longstanding “heir and spare” dynamic that shaped their upbringing. Sources close to the Royal Family suggested that some members were appalled by the disclosure of private conversations and sensitive details, feeling that a line had been crossed. Against this tense backdrop, many wondered whether an invitation to the coronation would even be extended.

Despite the strain, a spokesperson confirmed that Harry had received correspondence from the King’s office regarding the ceremony. Harry later stated in a television interview that the “door is always open” and that discussions were ongoing, suggesting that his attendance depended on meaningful dialogue. Ultimately, confirmation came from Buckingham Palace that Harry would attend the coronation service on May 6, while Meghan would remain in California with their children, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet.

The official reason for Meghan’s absence was straightforward: the coronation fell on Archie’s fourth birthday. Celebrating that milestone at home provided a clear and understandable explanation. However, many royal commentators believe the situation was more complex than a scheduling conflict. Some observers argued that Meghan’s presence would inevitably have drawn significant media attention, potentially distracting from the King on one of the most important days of his life. Given the intense scrutiny that has followed the Duchess for years, her attendance might have shifted headlines away from the ceremony itself and reignited divisive public debate.

Security was another reported factor. In their Netflix documentary and public statements, Harry and Meghan emphasized concerns about protection while in the United Kingdom. Insiders suggested that ensuring comprehensive security for Meghan during such a high-profile event would have been logistically challenging and extremely costly. There were also concerns about public reaction. Commentators noted that any visible hostility toward Meghan could reflect poorly on Britain at a moment meant to project unity and national pride.

Royal historian Tessa Dunlop offered insight into Harry’s emotional state, reflecting on his body language during Queen Elizabeth II’s funeral in September 2022. Dunlop observed that Harry appeared uncomfortable and heavily reliant on Meghan for support as they departed St George’s Chapel after the late Queen was laid to rest. According to her analysis, the couple’s shared experiences — including what they have described as painful aspects of their respective childhoods — have created a deep bond. With Meghan absent from the coronation, Dunlop suggested that Harry would be attending without his primary source of emotional reinforcement, leaving him more exposed both personally and symbolically.

Beyond logistics and optics, there were also reports that Meghan herself felt unresolved hurt stemming from her time as a working royal. According to sources close to the Sussexes, she believed she had been disrespected and unfairly treated by certain members of the institution and segments of the British press. Interviews in the past had alluded to feelings of isolation and lack of support. Some insiders suggested that genuine reconciliation would require acknowledgment of those grievances — and possibly an apology — before a full return to royal family events could feel appropriate. From that perspective, attending the coronation without addressing deeper issues may have seemed premature.

Despite Meghan’s decision to remain in California, reports indicated that King Charles was saddened by her absence but understanding of the circumstances. Sources claimed he had hoped the coronation might provide an opportunity to strengthen relationships and begin a new chapter of healing. At the same time, he was reportedly pleased that Harry would be present to witness the historic moment. Insiders emphasized that, regardless of tensions, Charles has always expressed love for his younger son and wanted him included in such a milestone occasion.

Other sources noted that for Harry, attending alone was significant. It allowed him to “play his part” and later tell his children that he witnessed his father’s crowning. While his seating arrangements and interactions were closely watched, the simple act of attending signaled that, despite profound disagreements, the familial bond had not been entirely severed.

In his first speech as monarch, King Charles spoke about continuity, service, and the evolving roles within his family. He formally recognized William as the new Prince of Wales and highlighted the importance of duty in the modern era. Against this broader narrative of transition and renewal, Harry’s presence — and Meghan’s absence — underscored the delicate balance between personal grievances and public responsibility.

Ultimately, the coronation symbolized both unity and division. It marked the beginning of a new reign while quietly reflecting the fractures within one of the world’s most famous families. Harry’s solo appearance represented a bridge, however tentative, between past and present. Meghan’s decision to stay home emphasized that healing remains a process rather than a single event. Together, these choices illustrated how personal emotion, institutional tradition, and global scrutiny continue to shape the unfolding story of the modern British monarchy.