Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, is set to attend his father King Charles’ coronation next week.

However, he will also make it a priority to be present for his eldest child Archie’s fourth birthday, which falls on the same day.

According to an insider, Harry is determined to return in time for the intimate celebration.

It is worth noting that Harry will be traveling by commercial flight, not private.

While Harry is expected to be at Westminster Abbey by 11am for his father’s ceremony, he plans to fly back to California to join his wife Meghan Markle and their son Archie by 3pm.

This decision has sparked speculation among some individuals who suspect that Meghan may have used a surrogate mother to give birth to Archie.

In a candid piece, Harry reflected on the chaotic circumstances surrounding Archie’s birth on May 6th, 2019, at the Portland Hospital in London.

He shared that they indulged in Nando’s chicken and enjoyed listening to songs in Sanskrit, following recommendations from an Ayurvedic doctor consulted by Meghan.

Harry also revealed that they did not send any text messages to announce the birth and were back at Frogmore Cottage with Archie within two hours of his arrival.

It was only a few weeks later that the press obtained Archie’s birth certificate.

Reportedly, Harry provided the necessary information for the certificate 11 days after his son’s birth, which is entirely within the legal timeframe.

The royal family typically adheres to tradition when announcing royal births, using the same wording decade after decade.

Yet, when Archie was born, they deviated from this customary practice.

The traditional announcement displayed outside Buckingham Palace usually states, “His or her royal highness, X, was safely delivered of a child at X time today.”

However, when Archie arrived, the announcement read, “The Queen and the royal family are delighted at the news that her royal highness, the Duchess of Sussex, was safely delivered of a son.”

This change in wording raised eyebrows and fueled speculation.

Furthermore, the Queen and her husband Prince Philip did not attend Archie’s baptism.

The palace cited conflicting schedules as the reason for their absence, which is not unprecedented.

The previous year, the Queen and Philip also missed the christening of William’s third child due to prior commitments.

Some have speculated that if Meghan did not carry the baby, it could explain the Queen’s decision to skip the baptism.

As the head of state, the Queen upholds integrity and is mindful of representing her country.

If Meghan did not give birth to Archie, it could create legal complications and potential scandal.

By passing off someone else’s child as his own heir and including him in the line of succession, they would be entangled in a web of deception.

Therefore, it is possible that the Queen, suspecting foul play, chose to distance herself from the baptism to protect the reputation of the monarchy and the Church.

In conclusion, Prince Harry is juggling his commitments between attending his father’s coronation and celebrating Archie’s birthday.

The suspicion surrounding Archie’s birth and the subsequent changes in the announcement format have fueled speculation and conspiracy theories.

While the Queen’s absence from the baptism cannot be definitively linked to these suspicions, it is plausible that she wanted to avoid any potential involvement in a controversial situation.