Royal experts continue to pick apart the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s sit-down chat with Oprah Winfrey, pointing out the couple’s many factual inaccuracies presented.

Many experts blame Meghan Markle, who made the most of the allegations, but biographer Robert Jobson told Express.co.uk that Prince Harry should bear some of the blame for the interview.

He said there were a number of “confused messages” in the interview, indicating that the former US actress “did not understand the system very well”

He cited their son Archie’s lack of a Prince title and the question of his security as examples.

Meghan was “being disingenuous” according to the royal biographer, rather than misleading outright.

Mr Jobson expressed surprise that Harry had not corrected his wife’s factual inaccuracies during the TV interview.

As a consequence, he described the Queen’s grandson as “a bit weak”

“The stuff about him not getting protection because he hasn’t been made a prince, that was completely wrong,” the expert said.

“And it’s not for the Queen to decide whether he gets protection anyway, it is for the Home Office.

“So the fact they got things wrong that slightly undermined their argument particularly with the fake marriage.

“I mean the Archbishop of Canterbury said that it was wrong.

“Harry must know that that is not true what she is saying.

“And he didn’t contradict her, he was a bit weak Harry.”

“I don’t understand why Harry, unless he’s not the sharpest tool in the shed, didn’t understand and explain to his wife.” Mr Jobson continued.

Meghan Markle’s suggestion that her son Archie be granted the title of Prince was ‘may have been wrong,’ her friend Omid Scobie has also suggested.

Speaking in a new documentary Discovery+’s Harry and Meghan: Recollections May Vary, Meghan and Harry’s London-based biographer said that ‘there’s more to the story’

‘If we are only going by what Meghan said to Oprah and what the palace have said so far about the situation with Archie, perhaps one can assume that Meghan was wrong in her interpretation of it. But we also know that there is much more to this story that we don’t know about,’ he said.

Due to a century-old protocol, Archie, who does not have a title and goes by Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, did not have a birthright to be a prince.

Only royal descendants in the direct line of succession should be made princes and obtain HRH titles, according to a written order given by King George V in 1917.

‘…the grandchildren of the sons of any such sovereign in the direct male line (save only the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales) shall have and enjoy in all occasions the style and title enjoyed by the children of dukes of these our realms,’ according to the Letters Patent.

As a great-grandson of the king down the direct line of succession to the throne, only Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge’s eldest son Prince George was initially eligible to be a prince under the law.

The Queen intervened ahead of George’s birth in 2013, issuing a Letters Patent to guarantee that both of George’s siblings, as future monarch William’s offspring, would have appropriate titles, which were applied to Charles and Louis.

When his grandfather Charles, the Prince of Wales, succeeds to the throne, Archie would be eligible to be an HRH or a prince under the George V laws.