Ms Elser said the new book “wholly pushes back against the narrative of Meghan as the difficult, baddie HRH, instead establishing a scenario where she was only one half of an allegedly highly problematic duo”.

Writing for news.com.au, she said: “To me, the most glaring, important takeaway is not that former staffers called themselves the ‘Sussex Survivors Club’ or that insiders thought the Duchess was a ‘narcissistic sociopath’ but that time and again, it was allegedly not just Meghan who treated staff badly.

“Based on Low’s telling, Harry was just as complicit as his girlfriend-then-wife.”

Ms Elser goes on to suggest Meghan may not have been the “key agitator” behind Megxit and that Harry was already unsatisfied with royal life.

She accused the Sussexes’ critics of having a strong urge to “completely apportion blame” to either Harry or Meghan and neglecting to consider the fact that they acted as a couple.

The royal expert believes that the desire to pin the blame on Meghan in particular comes from a need to cling onto the public image of Harry as a “cheeky chappy” rather than acknolwedging that it was his deep unhappiness that led him to leave for the US.

The couple wanted a half-in half-out arrangement but the proposal was rejected by the monarchy amid fears they would be accused of cashing in on their royal status.

The Sussexes officially ended royal duties in March 2020 for a new life in the US.

They have set up home in the celebrity enclave of Montecito with their two children Archie and Lilibet.

Bullying allegations made by former Sussex staff against the Duchess emerged shortly before the explosive sit-down chat.

Her lawyers branded the claims a “calculated smear campaign” ahead of the interview and said the media was “being used by Buckingham Palace to peddle a wholly false narrative”.